There Aren't Many Johan Santanas These Days

[Matt Braun]

A 2006 rule change narrowed an avenue once ripe with opportunity and talent. 

Image courtesy of © Jerry Lai-USA TODAY Sports

Handed a chance to add a player to their major-league roster on Wednesday, the Twins—as they have done every year since 2017—passed. They weren’t solely driven by painful memories of Tyler Kinley and Justin Haley: The Rule 5 draft has, in recent years, devolved from a relatively consistent method of swiping talent to a largely barren, sure-let’s-shore-up-the-back-of-our-bullpen abstention fest. 

You can thank the 2006 CBA for this change. Before that year, players who signed at 18 or younger were eligible for the draft after four years; players signed at 19 or older needed just three years*. Emmanuel Rodriguez, for example, would have been eligible for last year’s Rule 5 process if the prior rules had still existed. The CBA pushed back the timeline a year for both age groups, allowing the Twins to wait until this offseason before ultimately deciding on Rodríguez.

It’s just one year—seemingly innocuous stuff, really—but an extra season secretly cuts down on the talent available for selection. As Andrew Simon wrote for MLB.com: “relatively few players have stuck with a drafting team and made an impact [since 2006], though Josh Hamilton, R.A. Dickey, Darren O'Day, Brad Keller, Ender Inciarte and Mark Canha are among others who have been selected during that time.”

Take Johan Santana. You know him. You love him! Santana was a 20-year-old fresh off a 4.66 ERA —a few ticks higher than the average hurler for the Midwest league that year. Needing to decide on his talents, the Astros gambled on leaving their $10,000 pitcher open for other teams to select, and the rest is well-documented history.

Had it been after 2006, Houston would have enjoyed a bonus year of evaluation. Perhaps Santana flashes enough in his extra season to convince Astros decision-makers of his worth. In fact, it seems almost certain that he would have.

--------------------

The last time a Rule 5 pick turned into an All-Star was in 2018, when the White Sox selected Jordan Romano… who only became an All-Star once he returned to his previous franchise. The only time before that was in 2017, when the Orioles selected Nestor Cortes… who only became an All-Star once he returned to his previous franchise. Other selections have turned into ancillary contributors or one- or two-year wonders. The last time a player turned into an All-Star for the team that drafted him was Odúbel Herrera, nearly a decade ago. 

The bonus year is grinding the already lengthy evaluation process to the point where no one misses. If a player hasn’t become a desirable prospect by the point at which he becomes eligible under the current rules, he likely never will be. 

In thinking about the Rule 5 draft and the changes made in 2006, I initially believed the new rules to be anti-player but pro-team. The talented must wait, laboring under the watch of a franchise safe in their evaluations. The team knows they have time; what’s the rush in ensuring they have someone of value? 

But, really, this process is only a boon to conservative teams. The swashbucklers of the league—the franchises who dare to bet on talent—have a worse chance at swiping a George Bell or a Shane Victorino, because it’s more evident to the original franchise whether they have a Victorino worth keeping. The cement is dried and set. Your best hope these days is to get a Brad Keller or maybe a Victor Reyes.

It’s a bit of a travesty, just another minor alteration that makes the sport slightly worse for the fan. Given baseball’s place as the game most rooted in entropy—with Willi Castros popping up every season like clockwork—making it harder for teams to potentially hit the jackpot on talent creates a lesser product. Santana was an outlier, but can you imagine the mid-2000s Twins without him? What potential Santanas never wowed their fanbase because they never received the chance?

*The specific wording is “professional seasons,” with occasional loopholes for players assigned to a team whose season has already ended. See J.J. Cooper’s article on Baseball America for more details. https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/explaining-the-rule-5-draft/

What's your reaction? Is this change hurting the fan and player experience of baseball? Should it be revisited in future CBA negotiations? Join the conversation in the comments.

View full article

[Doctor Gast]

Not only is Santana is an absolute rule 5 wonder he is an absolute wonder period. Santana is my favorite Twins SP, and I've seen them all. From Pasqual to Lopez. He should be in the HOF, one CYA was stolen from him, you'd think the 1st perfect game pitched in NYM (that was the start of his downfall) would merit love from them? He is the SP that I have enjoyed most watching, Besides his accolades, & records he was a great clubhouse guy, very laid back, fun loving, caring & anytime their was a rally he'd be the lead cheerleader. His career was cut short but if those who voted really knew Johann Santana, he'd be voted in the 1st ballot.

[arby58]

I see it differently. Turning the rule 5 draft into a sort of lottery where everybody can 'win big' doesn't seem to right any injustices to me. Meanwhile, the team that originally drafted or signed the player, developed him for several years, now must make an earlier judgement on their ultimate ability. I'm not seeing the point of that, from the perspective of improving the overall product. IF the Twins had not protected Rodriguez last year and he was lost and went on to become a huge star, how would Twins fans react to that? I think it good for players to come up through a system, and, as a fan, I get more enjoyment out of that than a game of minor league musical chairs.

[DJL44]

I don't think it helps the game on the field to force players who aren't ready onto rosters earlier.

[stringer bell]

On the position player side, the current 13-man pitching staffs make it very difficult to carry a developmental player for a full season. Having only four bench guys (one has to be a catcher) pretty much demands guys who can be plugged in for a week at one or more positions. 

 

[old nurse]

It took them 3 years for Santana to develop. Not every team has that luxury. A Santana is also part of the reason why they don’t have that luxury. Done at 30. Pitch counts and innings may have prolonged his career. Bullpens are used more so there isn’t a stash spot. The number of pitchers selected appears to be geared towards finding bullpen pitchers, swing pitchers. Wells in Baltimore, Whitlock in Boston. Are the best examples. A team still has to do their diligence in looking and protecting. Somebody else can look to see if there were DFAs that were done to protect prospects blossomed into something.  That is also the byproduct of the system. Also trades to clear roster spots. I think Nick Anderson was one. Diligence finds these players. Twins have been on the short end of that, but I don’t think this regime had much use for a lot of the Ryan prospects.

[KBJ1]

If a player blossoms during that extra year, then the team that drafted, invested and developed him would bring him up soon enough and get their reward. Not fair to the team losing talent they have invested in. If they are well stocked at a position and can't protect a marginal player after 4 or 5 years, then at least it gives that player a chance elsewhere and doesn't hurt the team that invested in them as much.

Seems about right.

[jmlease1]

1 hour ago, stringer bell said:

On the position player side, the current 13-man pitching staffs make it very difficult to carry a developmental player for a full season. Having only four bench guys (one has to be a catcher) pretty much demands guys who can be plugged in for a week at one or more positions. 

 

I think that aspect to MLB roster management is making it much harder to take a position player in the Rule 5. Even with pitchers it's hard because the expectation is that you are using your entire 26-man roster the whole season and not carry players than don't play much by design. Now, I do think teams mis-use that 13th pitching slot; the impact of a reliever who only throws once every ten days is pretty limited, but good luck changing the mid-set of teams who are trying to hedge against worst-case scenarios at all times...

[darin617]

Unless your team doesn't caring about winning the upcoming season it's pretty hard to hide a pitcher in the bullpen all season or a batter on the bench unless he's a speed guy.

With starters barely going 6 innings any more your bullpen has to work more innings and like I said earlier it's hard to just stash a guy all year on the roster.

[Shaitan]

No mention of Ryan Pressley?

As others have said, it's more about the concept as a whole than that 1 year rule change. The draft forces teams to carry developmental players on the MLB roster -- often for multiple years before they peak (even Santana).

I'd be curious to see actual pre/post 2006 data though. How many players have stuck for the year? What is their WAR within their controlled years and how does that compare before and after? All Star appearances are interesting trivia, but they don't mean anything in terms of value.

[LanceJS]

On 12/8/2023 at 8:37 AM, Doctor Gast said:

Not only is Santana is an absolute rule 5 wonder he is an absolute wonder period. Santana is my favorite Twins SP, and I've seen them all. From Pasqual to Lopez. He should be in the HOF, one CYA was stolen from him, you'd think the 1st perfect game pitched in NYM (that was the start of his downfall) would merit love from them? He is the SP that I have enjoyed most watching, Besides his accolades, & records he was a great clubhouse guy, very laid back, fun loving, caring & anytime their was a rally he'd be the lead cheerleader. His career was cut short but if those who voted really knew Johann Santana, he'd be voted in the 1st ballot.

Absolutely true. I get some old timers mad when I do this, but you take Sandy Koufax in his 5 year peak and Johan Santana at his five year peak and they are very similar. Koufax did pitch in the pitchers’ era with a 15’’ Mound, batters without weightlifting or PEDs and frankly, the two are similar. Doesn’t matter if you use traditional or advanced stats, they come out similar.  Yet Koufax is considered the greatest LHP to some while Santana couldn’t get 5% on his first HOF ballot?  I am also convinced that had the trajectory he took with his two MLB teams been the other way around (dominant with the Mets, injuries while with the Twins) he would be in the HoF now.  

[Vanimal46]

I would argue to push the decision time another year back for both age groups. If the discussion is the rule 5 has become nothing but filling the back of the bullpen, maybe there will be more worthy talent to select with another year of development. 

[Doctor Gast]

I'll state my view again, IMO the rule 5 draft is a great thing. It prevents big teams from hoarding minor league players & it gives those players the opportunity to be MLB players. And it helps a little, small teams to become more competitive.

Because we are deep enough in pitchers & OFs, we haven't needed to dip into the rule 5 draft these last few years

 

[Shaitan]

4 hours ago, Doctor Gast said:

I'll state my view again, IMO the rule 5 draft is a great thing. It prevents big teams from hoarding minor league players & it gives those players the opportunity to be MLB players. And it helps a little, small teams to become more competitive.

Because we are deep enough in pitchers & OFs, we haven't needed to dip into the rule 5 draft these last few years

 

I think that it forces decisions about the 40 roster spots it why it sticks. That is a good thing for all players, even if DFA limbo has its own set of drawbacks.

The MLBPA signs off on this for a reason, and they generally look out for their best interests.