It’s that time of year. Its “Rule-5 time!”
We do it every year. Its our annual deep dive into our older prospects to see who the team may be thinking about protecting. Here’s links to past years posts on this topic: 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010. And here’s a summary of all these posts and my predictions versus who we actually protected (which we’ll re-publish once 2024’s rule-5 draft occurs at the Winter Meetings in December).
Many people think rule-5 is a waste (ahem, Keith Law). For those of us who pore over minor league box scores, hoping to find a diamond in the rough of our 160+ minor leaguers who might some day be wearing red and white Nationals home jerseys, its a deep-dive into what might be for these players and an always-fun exercise looking at the fringes of our prospects.
As a reminder, Rule 5 eligibility is as follows for any player not on a 40-man roster:
- Signed at 18-years-old or younger, has been in the organization for five seasons
- Signed at 19-years-old or older, has been in the organization for four seasons
So, generally speaking this translates to for 2024:
- IFAs or High Schoolers drafted/signed in 2020 or before
- College players drafted/signed in 2021 or before
(I say generally speaking because there are some IFAs who get signed later in the year, or who might have turned 19 by the time they sign and turn Rule-5 one year earlier than we thought).
On the same day that all our MLFAs were declared (11/4/24), the team also cut loose four players off the 40-man roster to free up space for the eventual addition of players that we’ll be discussing here. As of this writing on 11/8/24, there’s 36/40 on the 40-man, so we have four available spots right now for Rule5 protection, waiver claims, Free agent signings, etc. That’s not to say we don’t have even more room if need be (you can make pretty easy arguments for the out-righting of at least 3-4 more players right now; the option-less Adon, the constantly-injured Henry, the underperforming Willingham, the curiously low leverage usage Rainey), but we’ll cross those bridges if/when we get there.
Important Links for Rule-5 consideration:
- Nats Draft Tracker
- Nats IFA Tracker
- Nats Big Board
- Roster Resource
- 2024 MLFA List
- 2024 AFL Roster and 2024 AFL Stats, which sometimes portends Rule-5 drafts. rule-5 eligibles in AZ right now are Cronin, Cuevas, Saenz, Solesky, Hassell. Also there but not Rule-5 are Romero and Wallace.
Here we go. There’s several categories of players to consider; we’ll go one by one.
Group 1: Newly Eligible 2021 draft College Players this year
- There’s just one remaining College hitter from the 2021 draft who hasn’t already been released/retired (Frizzell, Williams, Fein) or made the 40-man roster (Young & Baker), and that’s mendoza-hitting Brandon Boissiere. Not a candidate.
- We have a slew of college arms that we drafted in 2021 who are newly rule-5 eligible. Dustin Saenz is the highest round draft pick (4th) and has the most bonus money investment, but he got pounded in AA this year and isn’t a candidate. He’s in the AFL but has a near 6.00 ERA.
- Marc Davis had great numbers this year, but mostly in low-A. He’s not going to be picked, but I do like him for the AA rotation in 2025.
- Andrew Alvarez was our 2023 minor league pitcher of the year, continued to be effective in AA to start this year, and ended the year in the AAA rotation. He doesn’t have eye-popping numbers, but he’s a lefty who gets people out. Despite his iffy prospect status, he should be added to the 40-man if only for the fact that he’s lefty and can slot in a bunch of ways in a MLB staff.
- Erik Tolman missed the entire season with injury; not a candidate.
- Jack Sinclair was a pretty decent 8th/9th inning guy for AA all year and seems like the kind of prospect who turns into a sneaky good middle reliever for a MLB pen. A marginal candidate to protect. If he had more K/9 or bigger velocities he’d be a lock.
- Brendan Collins: he was basically Jack Sinclair, but for Wilmington instead of Harrisburg. Better K/9 numbers, but more base-runners. A 25yr old in High-A all year tells you something; he’s not a candidate to be drafted.
Summary: Alvarez a near lock, Sinclair low-likelihood maybe
Group 1-A: 2021 NDFAs
- Jarrett Gonzalez, who has had an interesting pro career, is technically rule-5 Eligible. We drafted him in 2016 out of HS: he went to college (New Mexico initially, then some Jucos), then five years later we signed him as a NDFA. In those subsequent four pro seasons, he’s gotten a grand total of 30 at bats. Total. Thirty. He essentially has served as a third catcher/bullpen catcher for his entire minor league career, bouncing on and off the Development list over and over (six times in 2024 alone). I’m not knocking him, since there’s a need for him in every organization. From a rule-5 perspective, obviously he’s not a candidate to get picked. I’ll bet the team keeps him around for more of the same; why not right? As long as Gonzalez doesn’t mind the travel and the pay, he gets to keep living the dream.
- Peyton Glavine: famous name, huge injury issues. Basically missed the entirety of 2023 and 2024 with an arm issue. Would love to see what he’s got. not a candidate to get picked.
- Tyler Schoff was a relatively effective 8th/9th inning guy in 2023, making it all the way to AAA for a last week call up. He had solid AA numbers in 2024, backing up Sinclair as the closer. Why didn’t he get moved up earlier in 2024? I don’t know; if Sinclair is a “marginal candidate” to get protected then so is Schoff. He’s the kind of guy who gets protected out of the blue b/c the team feels he is slated to contribute immediately. Interestingly, he’s NOT on the AFL roster, so maybe that’s a hint that he doesn’t get protected. I dunno.
Summary: Schoff low-likelihood maybe
Group 2: Newly Eligible 2020 High School-age drafted players under consideration for protection
- The only HS kid we drafted in 2020 was Samuel Infante, who the team surprisingly released in July.
- However, we have a major prospect in 2020 prep draftee Robert Hassell to protect. Despite his struggles since arriving from San Diego in the Soto trade, he’s far too valuable to leave exposed. he’s in the AFL now raking and raising SSS eyebrows, will start in AAA, next year, and could make a push for promotion soon. Maybe he’s just a 4th outfielder ceiling, maybe he’s the guy who pushes Jacob Young for a starting CF spot.
Summary: Hassell a lock to be protected.
Group 3: Newly Eligible 2020 signed IFAs under consideration for protection
- So, technically thanks to Covid there was no official 2020 IFA class. As far as I can tell, we did end up signing three guys in the 2020 calendar year, but we’ve since released all three (Raynel Moron, Edward De La Cruz, and Luis German).
Summary: no candidates
Group 4: Rule-5 Eligible Drafted/Domestic hold-overs of note from prior years
- Here’s where it gets a little busy. We have a slew of hold-overs from prior rule5 draft eligibility. I’ll run through them by Draft year:
- 2020 Draft: Brad Lindsly is basically a 3rd catcher ceiling, while Holden Powell was injured most of 2024 and has not produced per his college closer UCLA pedigree. The lesson as always is: don’t draft guys who are already relievers.
- 2020 NDFAs: Paul Witt has hung around for years due to his ability to play multiple positions, but hit just .198 last year.
- 2019 Draft Hitters: Jake Alu, Jackson Cluff, JT Arruda, and Jack Dunn are all almost the identical player at this point: AAA or AA org guy middle infielders who can play the dirt but not hit well enough to be in serious consideration for the big club.
- CJ Stubbs was a 19D that we signed as a 2024MLFA and I think technically he’s Rule-5 eligible but he isn’t really a candidate to get picked despite being a AAA catcher.
- Chase Solesky, like Stubbs, was a 19D and 2024MLFA who had a nice run in the AA rotation this year (3.02 ERA as a AA starter) and who has been impressing in the AFL (20/1 K/BB in 13 innings as of this writing). His ERA looked good this year, but his K/9 did not (which doesn’t make sense given his strikeout performance so far in AFL). Do you look at this SSS in Arizona and say, “this guy is worth protecting?” Maybe. Or do you look at this guy and go, “ok he’s a 27yr old in AA, this is who he is” and pass? Probably the latter.
- Seth Shuman was a 19D acquired in trade who’s always been a favorite of mine. He’s always had decent numbers, missed all of 2023 with injury, and ended 2024 in AA’s rotation. I think he could be a dark-horse starter prospect who moves up in 2025, but he’s not a rule5 candidate.
- Matt Cronin is in the AFL and had some seriously weird usage this year. Despite unbelievably good numbers, he was left in High-A for months before getting promoted up to AA for the end of the season (reminder; he spent all of 2023 in AAA before getting hurt). He’s a lefty with a live arm who’s now in the AFL (but hasn’t appeared?) and that designation likely means he’s bound for the 40-man. This is the same team that protected Evan Lee in 2021 after an almost identical set of circumstances: a lefty who blew up K/9 rates and then impressed in the AFL.
- Garvin Alston, a 19D who we got in a 2022 Trade and who made it to AAA as a loogy this year. He didn’t have the best 2024 numbers, but is a lefty reliever. Not really a candidate.
- Other 2019 Pitchers: Tyler Yankowski was hurt all year. Todd Peterson, and Lucas Knowles worked the AA bullpen this year with decent but not impressive results. Knowles has some starting experience but seems to present more like a rubber-armed lefty swing man (kind of like Alvarez-light). If he had presented in AAA maybe.
- Michael Cuevas is only 23 and was in the AA rotation to start the season, but pitched his way out of the rotation. I like that he’s in AA at 23, but I don’t like his bloated ERA. He got sent to the AFL but doesn’t seem to have any appearances, so who knows. If he’s knowingly hurt, there’s no way he gets picked. I don’t think he was a candidate even before getting sent to Salt River.
- 2018 and previous draft classes: with the MLFA declarations last week, the SOLE remaining player on our roster from 2018 or earlier is now 40-man/rotation stalwart Jake Irvin. Every other 2018 or earlier drafted player is now gone. For basically the entire history of this franchise, one of two men held the title of, “longest tenured player” and it was either Zimmerman or Strasburg … now its Irvin.
Summary: Cronin decent likelihood, Solesky low likelihood.
Group 5: IFAs: 2019 and older
- We have a slew of them. I’ll only mention those that have gotten out of DSL/Rookie ball.
- Andry Lara. Lock to be added. Ace of AA at age 21, easy arm action, made huge strides this year. He’s part of a group of very young arms in our system that could pave the way for a new generation in our rotation (along with Sykora, Susana, and Clemmey)
- Kevin Made was acquired in trade and is a decent prospect; he’s a glove-first AA shortstop. Would someone take a flier on him like we did with Nunez? I don’t think he’s enough of a highly ranked prospect to do so.
- Roismar Quintana was a fringe prospect for us for a while but seems like he’s stuck as a position-less corner OF/1B type without enough power to make a difference. He’s not a candidate.
- Kelvin Diaz was an 19IFA who we got as a 24MLFA and who hit 180 in Low-A. Not a candidate.
- Miguel Gomez worked his way into being an 8th/9th inning guy at Wilmington this year, with effective numbers. I know some prospect-hounds like him a lot. Promising, but not rule-5 worthy. You just don’t take A-ball relievers in Rule5.
- We took Wander Arias last year in minor league rule-5 phase and he gave us a solid year in the High-A pen, but he was repeating the level from 2023. Not a candidate.
- Pablo Aldonis was on the low-A 60-day DL all year. As was Juan Abreu. As was Franklin Marquez. Not candidates.
- We have a slew of 2018IFA signings who should have been 6yr MLFAs but who were not on the BA list, nor who appear to have been declared FA. Maybe they were extra young and get another year, These guys might be MLFAs right now, or maybe we re-signed them for 2025. Nonetheless, Jose Colmenares, Yoander Rivero, Jeremy De La Rosa, Jose Atencio, Johan Otanez, Bryan Sanchez, and Samuel Vazquez all count here. De la Rosa used to have prospect buzz but is now a AA backup. Atencio had a solid year in the High-A rotation and is a name I’d like to see in AA for 2025, but that’s not Rule5 worthy.
- And, believe it or not we still have some 2017 and 2016 IFAs hanging around: Viandel Pena, Bryan Caceres, Daison Acosta. Caceres was in the High-A rotation all year but wasn’t great, Pena is a backup middle infielder, and Acosta put up solid AAA numbers for us after being a 2023 minor league rule5 pick. As with the 2018IFAs, these guys might actually be MLFAs but the milb.com player pages don’t indicate it as of this writing.
Summary: Lara a lock. Made unlikely. Atencio unlikely, Acosta unlikely. Others no.
So, where does that leave us? Summarizing the Groups:
- Group 1 Protection Candidates: Alvarez near lock, Sinclair maybe
- Group 1A Protection Candidates: Schoff maybe
- Group 2 Protection Candidates: Hassell a lock.
- Group 3 Protection Candidates: None
- Group 4 Protection Candidates: Cronin maybe, Solesky unlikely.
- Group 5 Protection Candidates: Lara a lock, Made, Atencio, Acosta unlikely
My Prediction: Team protects, in order of priority, Hassell, Lara, Cronin, Alvarez
Rule-5 results (post publishing): we’ll update this post once team announces its protection players.
Great read, Todd. Thanks for putting in the effort. I think that Hassell was always going to be protected, but his tearing up the AFL removes any doubt.
John C.
12 Nov 24 at 10:08 am
Great rundown, Todd. Thanks for being so thorough. I pretty much agree with all of your takes here, with just a couple of notes / questions.
One, I’m not sure if this is true, but I think players who have previously been outrighted off the 40 are ineligible to be picked in the R5 draft. If that’s correct, it means Cronin doesn’t need to be protected.
Two, Alvarez is an interesting case. He’s a left handed starter with decent numbers in the upper minors. A fringe prospect, but exactly the kind of player teams take flyers on in R5. But he’s pitchabiity over stuff, which caps his upside, and SP depth is actually something the Nats have well covered, so they may see him as expendable. Even without a FA signing and with moving Rutledge to the bullpen, where does Alvarez rank in the current depth chart? If you have him ahead of Lord or Stuart then you have to protect him, but if he’s 8th? And with Lara likely leap frogging him by the end of the year, and Susana and Sykora doing the same in 2026 – he doesn’t have a very easy path to playing time and the team might decide that it’s OK with the risk.
Still, we have the roster space, and Alvarez is enough of a prospect that it hurts to lose him for nothing, so I think he’s probably protected. I just think it’s a closer call than I was expecting to before I thought about it.
So my prediction is Lara and Hassell and (probably) Alvarez. I wouldn’t be too stunned if we lose Sinclair or Schoff in the draft, but I think the chances are under 50/50 and that’s a risk Rizzo’s willing to take. Very good but not dominant RH relief pitchers just aren’t highly regarded that highly.
SMS
12 Nov 24 at 10:18 am
Cronin and previous outrights: as far as I know yes: last year both Evan Lee and Rico Garcia were eligible as 40-man outrights. Google’s AI says, yes they’re eligible, but I can’t find a legitimate source proving it. It doesn’t seem to be in the latest CBA.
Roster Resource doesn’t list him as Rule5 eligible b/c they combine options and rule5 status in the same column (he has 2 options left). So that’s not a help.
I think we have two locks (Hassell and Lara), one high-maybe (Cronin), and one lower maybe (Alvarez). I’d protect them all because why not? we have the space right now, and we have more than a few guys who could get cut loose to make more room.
Todd Boss
12 Nov 24 at 11:32 am
My current SP depth chart for the org:
MLB: Gore, Grey (i), Irvin, Parker, Cavalli (i), Herz
non MLB 40-man: Rutledge, Adon, Henry (i)
AAA: Stuart, Alvarez, Lord
AA: Lara, Solesky, shuman, Luckham, Saenz, Knowles
At the end of the day, we have just NINE starters on the 40-man; 4 ended year healthy in MLB rotation, 3 ended the year with major injury question marks, 1 is out of options and was awful in AAA, and one (Rutledge) was god-awful in 2024.
I’m assuming we buy a FA starter to be the 5th in the MLB. I can’t trust Cavalli to be ready. So, the moment we add Alvarez and Lara, they become basically our 6th and 7th arms on the depth chart. BUT, Lara isn’t ready to jump to the MLB in April of 2025; he needs time. Is Alvarez better than Stuart and Lord? Probably not quite … but from a positinal flexibility perspective, his lefty arm gives him a ton more options for a MLB staff. Which is why i’d protect him.
Todd Boss
12 Nov 24 at 11:40 am
If you’re right about Cronin, then I’m exactly with you on the prediction.
But I’m still fuzzy about the applicable rule. MLB Glossary reads: “Players signed at age 18 or younger need to be added to their club’s 40-Man roster within five seasons or they become eligible for the Rule 5 Draft. Players who signed at age 19 or older need to be protected within four seasons.”
Cronin was added to the 40-man in the allotted time, so by the exact letter, he’s ineligible. But I totally get that’s an edge case and that the MLB glossary entries often fall short of legal exactness.
So I don’t know what the rule is. I wish it was easier to find the actual governing documents for this kind of thing.
SMS
12 Nov 24 at 11:55 am
Re the depth chart – I guess my point is that if you think Lord or Stuart are better pitchers than Alvarez (better now, I mean, not counting future development), then the team has the option of selecting their contracts when/if needed. I don’t have a strong opinion on how those three should be ordered in terms of expected quality on OD25, but I think Rizzo may leave Alvarez unprotected if he has him third.
I also don’t think anyone behind those three are really on the depth chart at all. If injuries push the team past that point, they’ll sign a AAAA journeyman or convert Adon or Rutledge back to SP. Maybe if Lara looks great in Spring, he can force his way on to the list, but I can’t imagine what Susana or Sykora could do to be in the majors before September, and even that would require incredible seasons from them.
Another thing I noticed looking through the roster is that a ton of folks are incoming next offseason. If we think of Alvarez as the borderline R5 case, I have 7 prospects ranked higher becoming eligible next year: House, Lile, Wallace, Bennett, Lord, Stuart and Grissom.
I expect some of those will be added to the roster during the season and a couple may underperform to such an extent to fall out of consideration, but we only have 3 FAs leaving at the end of the year (Finn, Law and Rainey), so there’s a chance that next year we’ll see a pretty extreme roster crunch.
SMS
12 Nov 24 at 12:44 pm
Next year eligibility; absolutely. And i’ll bet we see half or more of those major names added throughout this year. It’s a good problem to have right?
Todd Boss
12 Nov 24 at 1:43 pm
On depth chart: yes I think Stuart/Lord are better … but they’re also not rule5 yet, so the team is not going to be in a massive hurry to call them up. Lord had 12 AAA starts, Stuart just 4 (and he was bad). Alvarenz had 16 with lesser numbers than Lords, but of course is a lefty. You probably can make the argument that the pecking order is Alvarez, Lord, Stuart anyway.
Todd Boss
12 Nov 24 at 1:52 pm
Agree that Hassell and Lara are locks. I’m conflicted on Alvarez. Debate about him is, at least in part, Alvarez vs. dead wood on the 40-man, as they’re likely to add a good handful of MLB-contract free agents (I’d set the over/under at 4.5).
One note I would make in favor of protecting Alvarez is that when I’ve looked through the Rule 5 availables in the past, particularly the year that the Nats took Ward, is that very few of them had significant experience at AAA. Alvarez had 16 starts at AAA, which would make him stand out on such a list. He also has no known history of arm trouble, and Rule 5 is filled with past-wounded wings. Those two things plus him being a lefty would make him an attractive candidate for other organizations to draft.
I applaud the Nat for their handling of Lara. In the past they have made the mistake of protecting guys too early when they didn’t need to be protected — Adon, de la Rosa, Antuna, and many others. They didn’t jump the gun with Lara last year, and without that extra 40-man pressure, he flourished. The curious thing about him is that he’s gone from being over-hyped based on reputation to under-appreciated based on actual performance. BA doesn’t have him in their just-released Nat top 10. I don’t know whether he’s going to be a star, but I do know that at age 21 he was close to dominant at A+ and held his own at AA.
We’ve scratched our heads quite a bit about what it is that they’re not seeing in Cronin, but he isn’t getting protected. He’s also doing himself no favors with his struggles in SSS in the AZ Fall League. He’s already 27, and I have no explanation of why he hasn’t at least rated a cup of coffee by now, considering the zillion mediocre bullpen arms the Nats have cycled through over the last two or three years. (Cronin’s career minor-league ERA is 2.27, 1.11 WHIP, 11.8 K/9, 5.9 H/9. Yes, there is the relatively high 4.1 BB/9.)
KW
12 Nov 24 at 4:31 pm
Todd, you don’t have Susana penciled in at AA? True that he’s not yet MLB starting pitching depth (he and Sykora are both only 20).
John C.
12 Nov 24 at 7:26 pm
Susana would figure to be at AA.
The AAA rotation could be Lara, Alvarez, Stuart, Lord, and Rutledge . . . unless they will ever move Rutledge to the ‘pen. Adon is out of options and figures to be DFA’d sooner or later. I’ve given up hope for Henry, who I was really high on. Wouldn’t be surprised if they sign a still-hanging-on former MLB starter or two to fill out the Rochester rotation.
Stuart really intrigues me. He was lights out at Harrisburg after the trade, came back to earth at Rochester. He apparently doesn’t bring as much heat as his size would promise, but the Nats are on a role with lefties with some funk with Parker, Herz, Alvarez, and Stuart.
KW
12 Nov 24 at 8:43 pm
I might be one of Cronin’s biggest proponents, but he had a poor finish to the season. After a historically good stint in Wilmington, an inexplicably low level for him to play at, he was merely mediocre in Harrisburg (still a full level below where he was last season). He’s since been disastrous in the AFL, where he’s walked 6 and struck out only 3 in 7 IP good for a 9.00 ERA and 2.42 WHIP. Yes, it’s a hitters’ league, but that’s still well below average, and as a newly turned 27 year old, you’d expect better.
Thus, given the Nats’ illogical treatment of him this season and his poor finish, I don’t think the Nats protect him, even if I hope they do.
Will
13 Nov 24 at 7:16 am
JohnC: i just noted where these guys ended up in 2024 as a shorthand analysis. Absolutely Susana heading up. I havn’t done my “post-mortem” massive post yet where i start to try to predict next year’s rotations. It’s a many hours post.
Todd Boss
13 Nov 24 at 10:22 am
Will: can’t disagree on Cronin’s weird season and the team’s handling of him. Maybe there’s something else there. But why would they send him to AFL? I dunno.
Todd Boss
13 Nov 24 at 10:23 am
I’m never quite sure if guys coming up on Rule 5 get sent to AZ for one last chance to prove themselves, or for advertisement purposes for other teams. What Cronin had left to prove in a season where he posted an overall 1.42 ERA is unclear. One could speculate that they wanted him to get more innings, particularly after missing much of 2023.
KW
13 Nov 24 at 11:34 am
Thanks Todd. No criticism was intended. I look forward to the full post whenever you get around to it. It’s a long offseason – pace yourself!
John C.
13 Nov 24 at 12:15 pm
Susana: i’m cautiously optimistic that Susana will be a key part of the next wave of starting pitching that drives the Nationals.
– Susana: 20 in High-A, 4.14 era in 10 starts there to end 2024. Honestly, I think the Nats probably do their typical split season thing and start him in Wilmington next April, then move him up after a month. They like that pattern.
– Sykora: 20 and just dominated Low-A: 2.33 ERA in 20 starts. He only stayed down to power them in the playoffs; absolutely is in High-A to start 2025.
– Lara: 21 in AA: 3.63 ERA in 19 starts. Probably more impressive than any of the others on this list
– Clemmey: 19 an a full season in Low-A. 4.58 ERA in 25 starts.
– Roman: 21 in Low-A; great numbers 3 years running; can he be converted to a starter?
Todd Boss
13 Nov 24 at 1:08 pm
Sykora could be a two-level guy in 2025. There’s no rush, but there’s also no reason to hold him back if he continues to dominate.
There are several gurus who are really high on Clemmey. BA just ranked him as the #6 guy in the system (including both pitchers and hitters). He had a 6.1 BB/9 across the season that will need some work. Another great young arm, though, for the Winker rental.
We had a good discussion of Susana recently at Nats Prospects. He had a handful of rough outings that skewed some really dominant numbers. Law says that he works at an “easy” 100-102, and it doesn’t diminish across the innings. Law’s big concern is that Susana doesn’t have a great out pitch against LHB. His 2024 splits confirm this: basically unhittable against RHB (.193/.247/.269), but LHB get on base against him at an astounding rate (.276/.407/.344). He walked only 12 RHB vs. 36 LHB. Neither side of the plate squared up his heat very well, though: only two total homers surrendered in 103.2 IP, and only 20 doubles and one triple.
KW
13 Nov 24 at 6:32 pm