Nationals Return Elvin Ramirez To Mets

The Nationals announced that they returned Rule 5 selection Elvin Ramirez to the Mets. The right-hander spent the season on the 60-day DL after undergoing an operation on his throwing shoulder. The Nationals conserve 40-man roster space with the move.

Ramirez, 24, was sidelined all season and never pitched in a game for the Nationals or one of their affiliates. He posted a 4.16 ERA with 8.1 K/9 and 5.5 BB/9 in 80 innings for two of the Mets' affiliates before the Nationals selected him in last December's draft.

Players have to spend 90 non-September days on the active roster to become official property of their new teams. Otherwise, their Rule 5 status carries forward until the players spend 90 non-September days on the active roster. For a complete recap of the December 2010 Rule 5 draft, click here.


14 Responses to Nationals Return Elvin Ramirez To Mets Leave a Reply

  1. Dan Hyde 4 years ago

    Nevermind

    • tacko 4 years ago

      He’s a Rule 5 pick and he spent the whole year one the DL, so Ramirez didn’t spend enough non-September days on the Nationals roster. The Nats were forced to return him back to the Mets.

  2. CaseyBlakeDeWitt 4 years ago

    So, if the Nationals had held on to him for 90-days in the 2012 season then they could have sent him down? Or does the Rule 5 status stick with them the whole year until they acquire the necessary amount of time on the active roster?

    • Chris Whitby 4 years ago

      As per the article,┬áthe “Rule 5 status carries forward until the players spend 90 non-September days on the active roster.” So the latter – the Rule 5 status sticks until he spends 90 non-DL days on the big league roster. Hope that makes sense.

      • CaseyBlakeDeWitt 4 years ago

        No, I understand that. But I’m asking if the Nationals had tried to hold on to him into next year, could they have had him on the active roster for the first 90 days of the 2012 season, and then had the ability to demote him? I wasn’t sure because that would be his second season with the team.

      • CaseyBlakeDeWitt 4 years ago

        No, I understand that. But I’m asking if the Nationals had tried to hold on to him into next year, could they have had him on the active roster for the first 90 days of the 2012 season, and then had the ability to demote him? I wasn’t sure because that would be his second season with the team.

  3. Finally some great news for my Mets

  4. MetsFanXXIII 4 years ago

    The Mets abused him anyway.

  5. HalfSt 4 years ago

    It is good that the Nats are finally reaching the point that Rule 5 will not be a necessary great opportunity for them. As a matter of fact, i more worry that they will lose somebody with promise. I am still amazed that Michael Martinez stuck with the Phillies all year. I guess he will be back in AAA next season for them.

    +1/2St.

  6. NatsTown 4 years ago

    Welp there goes our future

  7. Christopher Soto 4 years ago

    Yawnnnn……Ramirez is nothing more than cannon fodder for the AAA team….granted the whole Mets team was basically rookies and AAA cannon fodder players.

Leave a Reply