Rule 5 Decisions: Trevor McDonald

Throwing a curve into the proceedings

The whole point of the “Rule 5 Decision series” is plausibility. Can you build a plausible case for using a 40-man spot on a player. It’s hard. It should be hard. The fact is that very few players are ever selected in the Rule 5 draft — last year the number was 15, and we’ve seen as few as nine players selected under the current Rule 5 format, which went into effect in 2006. The fact is, most cases should build to a “No,” because that’s where most of the front office’s decisions lead.

Sometimes, however, it’s good to change up the focus a bit and throw a curveball. Start beyond the point of plausibility just to see if there’s a case for the wild card, the irrational. After all, there are always protection decisions you didn’t see coming, and it follows that the reason you didn’t see them coming is that you stared too long through a single lens and lost some perspective. Focus too intently on fastball locations and those curveballs will get you.

So for today’s Rule 5 decision, I’m changing things up. It doesn’t feel like there’s a very plausible case to protect Trevor McDonald, but just maybe, he’s the one we didn’t see coming. He’s the curveball. Which is fitting, since, as it happens, curveballs are a significant part of McDonald’s charm.