Morlan/Rule 5 Draft
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 21, 2008 3:33 PM EST
32 comments
Essentially the rules are this:
• If 18 years old or younger on the June 5 preceding the player's original signing date, the player is subject to selection at the fifth Rule 5 Draft following the player's original contract;
• If 19 years old or older on the June 5 preceding the player's original signing date, the player is subject to selection at the fourth Rule 5 Draft following the player's original contract;
Morlan was 18 when he signed in mid-June, 2004. Meaning he passed drafts in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and is now eligible for the 2008 Rule 5 draft. The Rays can no longer add non-free agents/traded players to the 40 man, so unless he's traded, he's going to be selectable. The good news is, he's unlikely to stick on a roster for the entire season. The bad news is: he's apparently not what we were hoping for, despite decent numbers last season.
Edit: Unless there's some injury bypass the Rays can press for, since Morlan did miss time with a shoulder injury this year.
There's not.
Others who appear eligible:
Ryan Royster
Chris Nowak
Matt Spring
Wood Fines
Wade Townsend
Chris Mason
Mike Wlodarczyk
0 recs |
32 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Morlan is the only one on that list with a chance to be halfway decent in the majors in 09
However, he is probably barely ready for AAA and if he gets picked, we will probably get him back.
by joeybw on Nov 21, 2008 3:45 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
You know what would of been amusing to me?
If Townsend wasn’t hurt and someone( Royals? Pirates) gave him a chance at the majors, be interesting to see how much he implodes
by joeybw on Nov 21, 2008 4:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
watching townsend pitch in the majors right now if healthy would be laughable
everything Rays,Marlins,Twins and Reds
by RaysOfHope on Nov 21, 2008 11:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
One quibble
You are correct, he’s eligible. But, Tony (at the site linked) corrected the quoted material. The “effective season” info is no longer true. It used to be you could sign an international player in 2004 to a “2005 contract.” The 2006 CBA eliminated that. Now if you sign in 2004 you count as 2004 in the Rule 5. Morlan was drafted and signed (and played) in 2004, so he’s eligible. There is no “injury bypass” for Rule 5, that’s for option years. As with others, I can’t understand keeping Ryu over him. Relievers are the easiest Rule 5 selections to “hide” on a MLB roster. Just use him in mop-up situations where it doesn’t matter. He’s pitching this winter in the Puerto Rican Winter League so he’s not hurt. No idea. Other than him, Nowak is the only one I’d like to keep, but it’s not a great loss.
http://www.raysprospects.com/
by DAM on Nov 21, 2008 4:39 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Yes, but
Teams can get an extra year if the player misses an entire season due to injury. Obviously morlan did not.
by Raymond's Evil Twin Brother on Nov 22, 2008 1:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope
See Townsend, Wade.
http://www.raysprospects.com/
by DAM on Nov 22, 2008 3:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Your point?
The team has to ask for the exemption. This is Townsend’s first year of eligibility. Who says the Rays won’t asks for and receive an exemption?
by Raymond's Evil Twin Brother on Nov 22, 2008 3:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No point, he's out for the year.
Some team might store him on the DL, but whatever.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 22, 2008 4:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Point
There are no exemptions for missed time due to injury, or anything else (Josh Hamilton). You may be thinking of asking for additional option years, which MLB can grant if a team asks (Michael Aubrey comes to mind). But Rule 5 has nothing to do with options, you’re either eligible or you’re not, no exceptions.
http://www.raysprospects.com/
by DAM on Nov 22, 2008 4:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
seriously?
there is no way they leave Mason unprotected, odds are he could stick on a ML roster, even if not in a spectacular way…
by davidsmarch on Nov 21, 2008 6:19 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Seriously.
And there’s no way they can add him now.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 21, 2008 7:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
can they put morlan on the DL or something?
by walkoffwalk on Nov 21, 2008 6:59 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
No injury bypass for Rule 5
I think the thought with Morlan is that he’s looked mediocre lately, and there’s a lower chance that he’ll be picked in Rule 5 (and then stick on a major league roster for a full season) than the chance that he’ll be ready to stick in the majors in the next three years if he’s put on the 40-man roster and starts using up options.
None of the others worry me in the least. Townsend might be a pick-and-stash on the DL candidate (as might Chuck Tiffany, who’s also eligible), but I think the chances he becomes an above-average major leaguer are negligible at this point.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
by Brickhaus on Nov 21, 2008 7:41 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Could this be a sign of an impending trade?
by rays_world_champs on Nov 21, 2008 9:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Possibly, but it doesn't matter as far as Morlan
Anyone who’s qualified and not on their team’s 40-man as of 11/20 is eligible for the Rule 5 draft. So even if you trade him, he can’t be added now to the new team, kills his value. Trade him to the Twins, doesn’t matter, Rule 5 eligible. But, the opening on our 40-man, we have 39, is a possible sign of a trade, or a FA signing. If we trade prospects (non-Rule 5 types) for a guy in MLB for instance, we would need a roster spot, so with an opening, no one else gets dropped. Same thing goes for a free agent, if we sign CC for $140.2mm tomorrow, we need a roster spot. And, if we spot someone from another teams Rule 5 list we’re interested in, we can’t even participate in the Rule 5 unless we have an opening on the 40-man (last I looked, 8 teams are full, so 21 and us are in the draft). But realistically, with the team as it is presently set, I would guess free agent. We’re beyond the “hide the Rule 5 reliver/5th OF” level.
http://www.raysprospects.com/
by DAM on Nov 21, 2008 11:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
RJ, do you think they just didn't realize he was eligible for the Rule V?
by walkoffwalk on Nov 22, 2008 9:31 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think they know his status
They were more aware of McClung’s status than he himself and his agent were
by Jason Collette on Nov 22, 2008 9:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i don't know if that is good or bad...but not sure how this could be a calculated decision.
by walkoffwalk on Nov 22, 2008 12:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
read my post.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
by Brickhaus on Nov 22, 2008 12:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ryu? What about Orvella?
Why keep him?
Also, no mention of Rhyne Hughes as eligible in all this. Again, drafted in ‘04, so he too is eligible. Looked good in AFL. But 1B’s are hard to stash for a season, so he’s unlikely to stick if picked.
I was very surprised Morlan wasn’t protected as I mentioned back in the original post about who was. I could see someone taking him and keeping him, particularly a lower end team. He’s young, so a year of lesser activity, then starting him in AAA in ‘10 shouldn’t be a big deal for the right club. My team has some same issues as we had a lot of upper level RP’s performing well and eligible – Kevin Whelan the most notable, but others too that could go. Relievers are the easiest to nurse through a season, plus any minor injury urns into an immediate DL’ing.
by nyyfaninlaaland on Nov 23, 2008 5:29 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Some others that appear eligible to me
From AA: R. Morse, N.Frontz, B. Baker, C.Tiffany, B. Mann, J. De La Rosa, C. Suarez, J.T. Hall, S. Pedroza, a few others.
From A: M. Walker (his stock has tumbled), D. Downs, C. Lopez, C. Kelly
No big deals here, but those on rosters below AAA – no idea who’s added there – could be available in minors rounds, where there’s no requirement to return them. I don’t know if there is additional protection in these rounds – RJ? (I actually e-mailed Lisa Winston of MiLB.com, but after an initial reply haven’t gotten an answer) – though I thought you could protect an added player if 1 was drafted, and you can’t lose more than 5 in the whole process.
I wouldn’t be overly concerned about any of the above, but you’re free to differ.
by nyyfaninlaaland on Nov 23, 2008 5:56 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
