The Nats season is a hard one for those that like drama. The Nats opened the season going 21-9 and taking a 6+ game lead. They went a mediocre 30-27 over the next two months... and gained two games in the standings. The rest of the NL East has made the Nats drive to a division title a race against themselves.
But now, after weeks and weeks of fun but kind of meaningless feeling baseball, finally we are at the part of the season that matters. We are to the trade deadline, where the Nats may, or may not, shore up their team for the playoffs. After this will come the positioning of August and September, getting players healthy and potentially fighting off the surging Cubs for home field in the NLDS. The Nats went into the trade deadline with three potential tasks.
The undeniable one, the one they HAD to do, was address the bullpen with at least two arms. They did that right away. The other ones were more questionable. In a perfect world they would add a top half of the rotation starter (to compensate for the 4/5 troubles they've had this year and cover for the potential Strasburg injury), a proven closer (because - you know they don't have one), and a solid corner OF (to cover the injuries of MAT and Werth, and give them a great bench if/when these guys return). Of course in a perfect world these would cost nothing as well.
In the real world it was more realistic to hope for MAYBE one or more of a fair back of the rotation guy (to fill-in as necessary at the back of the rotation and save some pen arms), another bullpen arm (because Doolittle is an injury risk), and a decent 4th OF corner OF type.
Well the Nats did get the last thing done, bringing in Howie Kendrick for McKenzie Mills.
Why did the Nats need Kendrick? Well Jayson Werth last played on June 3rd. He's just now swinging the bat and still has to run and throw. He's a few weeks out at best. MAT last played on July 6th. He's up to playing catch. He could be back soon if he feels good swinging. Six weeks is a good guess for an oblique. But even back to health an oblique injury is an easy one to reinjure because you use it for everything and can't really compensate for it. Chris Heisey strained his groin, putting himself out for some extended period and he was also hitting .162 with 1 homer this year. Ryan Rayburn is out too! In short - a lot of OF options were not looking good.
That's why they needed an OF. Why Kendrick? A few reasons. He's a rental and the Nats, for the most part, want a rental for this spot. They like Bryce, Eaton for two of their OF spots and are probably looking to let MAT try and hold off Robles for the 3rd OF spot next year. They aren't looking for an ok OF with another year. The Phillies were willing, for the right prospect price, to eat the remaining 3 million or so of Kendrick's salary. This is something the Nats like more than other teams it seems. Kendrick can play multiple positions. He was a 2nd baseman, and a good one, for a long time but the Dodgers (and the numbers) saw something in 2015 that made them think his time there was at an end. He shifted to the outfield and became a pretty decent outfielder. He's put in time at first and third as well. It's not necessarily what you want to see - Kendrick playing something other than OF - but it's nice to know he can do it in a pinch. This is especially true with Stephen Drew facing an uncertain amount of time off due to injury. Plus he's not a bad runner making him a PR option as well.
But the most important reason is Kendrick can still hit. He had a little bit of a down year last year but otherwise has been a dependable bat all his career. At just 34 (birthday about 3 weeks ago) and hitting so far this year, you'd have to feel good that this year is not the year when it all goes away. He's an average hitter - and by that I mean he hits for average with just enough patience and power to make him a positive player if he can hit above .280 which he has done 9 out of the last 11 seasons. He's exactly the type of reliable contact bat you like to have on the bench, put the ball in play, move a runner over, that Raburn and Heisey are not.
Sounds great! What's the downside? Well he's been hurt a lot this year, missing seven weeks earlier this year and he's just coming back from missing a few days after getting hit in the hand. This isn't terribly new. He missed 40 games in 2015. 30+ in 2013. He'd mostly missed the big injuries but now the little ones are adding up. Also like I said, if he can hit above .280 he's fine. The further he goes under that the less value he has at the plate. A .260 Kendrick is... well... it's where you'd be saying "Difo hit pretty well this year. Let's stick with him". Also his lack of patience and power means he has a very specific role coming into the game. He's not giving you a long bomb or working a tough walk. He's hitting the ball in play.
Of course if he didn't have these flaws he wouldn't be a 4th OF on a contender would he?
The downside is basically the downside with any player you get at the trade deadline. If he doesn't do what he's good at, he doesn't have much value. The good news is that Kendrick is good at a few things. Runs well, fields well, contact hitting. So if he doesn't contact hit - yes he's a minus at the plate - but it doesn't make him a useless player. He can still contribute. It's a very nice pick-up in my opinion.
What did the Nats give up for this very nice pick-up? McKenzie Mills. Who is McKenzie Mills? Well he's one of those "high school guys given more time" that we talked about at the end of last week. He was drafted, and after a poor rookie league stint was brought up Low A. He did so poorly they dropped him back to Rookie League. If he were a 23 year old college guy that would be the end of it. but he was only 19, he had the size that teams love (6'4" 200+), and he was left-handed. So Mills got another go at low-A and what do you know? He improved. Not enough to get you excited but enough to move up and see what he could do in A-ball. What he has done is found himself. His big issue was always walks. To give you an example of how bad it was, when he improved himself in 2016 by cutting down his walks a TON they went all the way down... to over 4.5 per 9 IP. (If you don't know that's BAD). This year that number is down under 2 and his strikeouts, never impressive before, are up over 10.
Did the Nats give up a gem? Perhaps. The trend is what you want to see and this year has been good. But he's a ways off and whatever he's done to make this improvement has made him prone to the long ball. He's still got to prove things in High A. If he does that then you can start to worry that maybe something special got away. And I mean that very literally. If he has a similar season to this one, next year in High A, you can START to worry about this. That's it.
What's left for the Nats? Some targets for that back of the rotation and another pen arm are gone now. But we'll see. With news of Strasburg probably sitting out a second start coming out yesterday maybe we see something more dramatic than we would have expected a couple of weeks ago.
Monday, July 31, 2017
Friday, July 28, 2017
Our former guys
Just as a thought exercize I wondered how this below philosophy applied to guys the Nats already got rid of in trades?
Jesus Luzardo - age target for league which is great considering he had surgery. Impressive stats but so little to work with (20 IP) and so far down (rookie). All talent based
Sheldon Neuse - When Nats traded him he was a solid player in A-ball* not quite a prospect but perhaps rounding into one.
So Nats didn't really give up much here in terms of minor leaguers. Oakland has kept Luzardo in Rookie as part of the recovery year and moved Neuse up to High-A where he is younger and can become a real prospect if he succeeds there (too soon to tell)
Jeffrey Rosa (for Enny) - He was an old rookie league player with mediocre stats.
Nats got Enny for nothing.
Dane Dunning - First round draft pick who looked good in Low A and seemed ready and willing to be aggressively moved up in 2017 as per usual. Very early and in low minors but it was what you wanted to see.
Lucas Giolito - A true PROSPECT taht begin to hiccup a little in AA in 2015 as a 20 year old but still was way young. Despite not getting production there moved up to AAA in 2016 and performed well. Still a PROSPECT but the spectre of that overall mediocre AA performance was hanging over his head. That was 100+ innings saying he's being pushed beyond his current limits.
Reynaldo Lopez - Another PROSPECT, and another one with production issues. This time at High A in 2015 at 21. A little older than Giolito but responded better in 2016 to AA and AAA. He had a jump in K-rate in AA that was very promising, but it went right back down in AAA. Still a PROSPECT but with maybe only a year before age would force a downgrade.
These were legitimately two PROSPECTS and another guy who easily could be one in 2017. What you could say though is both the PROSPECTS were having production issues. It could be they were just young and going to get over it, but it could also be them hitting their level. Doesn't matter if you are major league good or AA good you should still look really good in low A. Since then Dunning looked real good in A-ball but has stalled a little in High A, keeping him in the prospect range rather than something more special. Giolito has seen things start really badly and then leveled out to adequate. Age keeps him as a PROSPECT, he's still two years under to low range for AAA, but he's looking far more AJ Cole than Stephen Strasburg. Reynaldo Lopez hasn't quite put it together but he's put up another solid year especially recently (In last 6 games - 1.96 ERA, 0.927 WHIP, Opp OPS .547, three of his four double digit K games this year) You may not be feeling ace but you'd have to say he's still a PROSPECT who should see major league time this year so who knows?
Max Schrock (for Rep) - A guy who you could honestly say made himself into a PROSPECT though you didn't see that in rankings. 21yo in High A with an .826 OPS.
By production arguably a better get than either of the guys the Nats gave to Oakland this year. This is where scouting diverges from me. Both those guys were essentially high draft picks, loved for talent and what could be. Schrock was a mid-range draft pick who had to perform to raise any eyebrows. Where as I accept what I see on the field, scouts are more dubious about these types.
As a waiver trade part - Schrock didn't play much for Oakland last year. This year they pushed him to AA and he's continued to perform, hitting .316 with an .816 OP in AA. He's still under the radar but he's a 22yo hitting well and fielding well in AA. He's done nothing production wise to say he's not a PROSPECT. Anyone saying something else is clinging to three year old scouting reports saying he shouldn't be able to be doing what he has been doing.
Taylor Hearn (other part of Melancon deal) - propsect who was kind of a young Enny. Great swing and miss stuff but when he didn't have it he was hittable and gave up bombs and walked too many. Kind of an outskirt prospect.
So he was more than a throw in to the deal, but less than a vital part. He was the change, where as Rivero was the dollars. The type of guy that gets thrown around in deals alot because he's interesting enough to tip the scales, but not vital enough to worry about losing. The Pirates seemed to say "don't worry about control. Just worry about not being hit" and it worked wonders in A-ball. However on his promotion to High A this year he's not quite as K-dominant and he needs to either be that or work on his walk-rate. Still a prospect up a level so that's good but needs to step up next year to keep it that way.
It's an interesting mix here. The Nats either paid too much for Rep or too little for Doolitte/Madson. I think Schrock and Giolito play into my hands - about production being paramount to talent. But Lopez is seemingly an age / time case where the talent guys can say that his natural skill just needed some more innings to catch up.
Also it shows these are decent guys that the Nats are giving up in terms of prospect value. However it should also show you that really only the best PROSPECTS are the guys you HAVE to protect. There's a lot of questions for anything else.
*Nationals Propsects does NYPL, Low A, High A. I do Low A, A, High A.
Jesus Luzardo - age target for league which is great considering he had surgery. Impressive stats but so little to work with (20 IP) and so far down (rookie). All talent based
Sheldon Neuse - When Nats traded him he was a solid player in A-ball* not quite a prospect but perhaps rounding into one.
So Nats didn't really give up much here in terms of minor leaguers. Oakland has kept Luzardo in Rookie as part of the recovery year and moved Neuse up to High-A where he is younger and can become a real prospect if he succeeds there (too soon to tell)
Jeffrey Rosa (for Enny) - He was an old rookie league player with mediocre stats.
Nats got Enny for nothing.
Dane Dunning - First round draft pick who looked good in Low A and seemed ready and willing to be aggressively moved up in 2017 as per usual. Very early and in low minors but it was what you wanted to see.
Lucas Giolito - A true PROSPECT taht begin to hiccup a little in AA in 2015 as a 20 year old but still was way young. Despite not getting production there moved up to AAA in 2016 and performed well. Still a PROSPECT but the spectre of that overall mediocre AA performance was hanging over his head. That was 100+ innings saying he's being pushed beyond his current limits.
Reynaldo Lopez - Another PROSPECT, and another one with production issues. This time at High A in 2015 at 21. A little older than Giolito but responded better in 2016 to AA and AAA. He had a jump in K-rate in AA that was very promising, but it went right back down in AAA. Still a PROSPECT but with maybe only a year before age would force a downgrade.
These were legitimately two PROSPECTS and another guy who easily could be one in 2017. What you could say though is both the PROSPECTS were having production issues. It could be they were just young and going to get over it, but it could also be them hitting their level. Doesn't matter if you are major league good or AA good you should still look really good in low A. Since then Dunning looked real good in A-ball but has stalled a little in High A, keeping him in the prospect range rather than something more special. Giolito has seen things start really badly and then leveled out to adequate. Age keeps him as a PROSPECT, he's still two years under to low range for AAA, but he's looking far more AJ Cole than Stephen Strasburg. Reynaldo Lopez hasn't quite put it together but he's put up another solid year especially recently (In last 6 games - 1.96 ERA, 0.927 WHIP, Opp OPS .547, three of his four double digit K games this year) You may not be feeling ace but you'd have to say he's still a PROSPECT who should see major league time this year so who knows?
Max Schrock (for Rep) - A guy who you could honestly say made himself into a PROSPECT though you didn't see that in rankings. 21yo in High A with an .826 OPS.
By production arguably a better get than either of the guys the Nats gave to Oakland this year. This is where scouting diverges from me. Both those guys were essentially high draft picks, loved for talent and what could be. Schrock was a mid-range draft pick who had to perform to raise any eyebrows. Where as I accept what I see on the field, scouts are more dubious about these types.
As a waiver trade part - Schrock didn't play much for Oakland last year. This year they pushed him to AA and he's continued to perform, hitting .316 with an .816 OP in AA. He's still under the radar but he's a 22yo hitting well and fielding well in AA. He's done nothing production wise to say he's not a PROSPECT. Anyone saying something else is clinging to three year old scouting reports saying he shouldn't be able to be doing what he has been doing.
Taylor Hearn (other part of Melancon deal) - propsect who was kind of a young Enny. Great swing and miss stuff but when he didn't have it he was hittable and gave up bombs and walked too many. Kind of an outskirt prospect.
So he was more than a throw in to the deal, but less than a vital part. He was the change, where as Rivero was the dollars. The type of guy that gets thrown around in deals alot because he's interesting enough to tip the scales, but not vital enough to worry about losing. The Pirates seemed to say "don't worry about control. Just worry about not being hit" and it worked wonders in A-ball. However on his promotion to High A this year he's not quite as K-dominant and he needs to either be that or work on his walk-rate. Still a prospect up a level so that's good but needs to step up next year to keep it that way.
It's an interesting mix here. The Nats either paid too much for Rep or too little for Doolitte/Madson. I think Schrock and Giolito play into my hands - about production being paramount to talent. But Lopez is seemingly an age / time case where the talent guys can say that his natural skill just needed some more innings to catch up.
Also it shows these are decent guys that the Nats are giving up in terms of prospect value. However it should also show you that really only the best PROSPECTS are the guys you HAVE to protect. There's a lot of questions for anything else.
*Nationals Propsects does NYPL, Low A, High A. I do Low A, A, High A.
Thursday, July 27, 2017
Our guys
A couple days ago someone brought up on Twitter the possibility of getting Felipe Rivero. Oddly a Pirates fan jumped in and claimed the Nats didn't have enough to get Rivero. That the asking price vaguely guessed at recently (3 Top 30-60 prospects in a deal with the Dodgers) was too low and that it would take FOUR Top 100 prospects to get Rivero, starting with a Top 15 one. Nevermind that Rivero has plied his trade as a dominant closer for all of 4 months. Nevermind this was way out of line with the vague deals offered for Osuna, a far more established young closer arm with only one fewer year of control. Nevermind that what he was saying was the Felipe Rivero, FELIPE RIVERO, should bring back arguably the greatest haul of prospects in baseball history. He believed it.
Of course Dodgers fans hated that original deal too. They felt it was far too much. And this is the dance we go through every year, specifically at the trade deadline. Our guys are too good. Your guys aren't good enough. Of course all any of us have is our opinions and as guys who probably have seen a few games at best of any of these players our opinions aren't going to be as good (we hope) as the scouts and the GMs that do this for a living. Still we can try to inject a little realism into the proceedings.
You are going to find other takes on these guys and you should! But here's how I like to think about prospects. They shouldn't be bad. This seems obvious but a lot of people are willing to overlook something poor thinking it will get better. I think prospects can improve but going from terrible at some point in the minors to good in the majors? You better be a 19yo in AAA. Which brings me to the second point. You should be young for your level. What does that mean. Here's a good chart, courtesy of Nationals Prospects In my opinion, if you are a prospect you should be doing well at the lowest end of these ages. If you are a PROSPECT you should be doing well below these ages. You can certainly develop into a useful player otherwise but with each flip of the calendar those chances diminish quickly. Also you do need to factor injuries into this. Injuries delay progress that the prospect could be making and would be making. Assuming he gets back to health he should just pop back up, behind the original schedule but still there.
A couple more points. I value production at AA and AAA far far far more than I do below that. I am close to dismissive of A and Low A performance unless it is just incredibly impressive. Because of this I probably undersell the youngest prospects. Also I forgive pitchers and catchers a little on the age, but just a year. I hate big strikeout totals for hitters and low strikeout totals for pitchers as those guys can be killed at the major league level. Finally, I don't see defense. Like I have no idea, so I rely on what I hear completely from other places. There really isn't an option for those that aren't going to see dozens of minor league games.
So that's how I look at things. The thing to understand is that everyone has their level at which they stop being a productive player.* We can use how they are doing currently to estimate that but you don't really know until they move up and prove it (or don't) on the field. That's particularly true the younger you go, when there still may be some noticeable physical changes, but it holds pretty much up through your mid/late 20s. Players learn and grow, but in the end everyone has a ceiling.
This is where I stand. It's not perfect but it seems to work ok. You should certainly trust guys who spend more time on this more** but you're here so on to the Nats best prospects.
Victor Robles - He's done everything you want. Dominated GCL to start, and since then he's been hitting while being below the usual low end at each level. Hit at A ball at young 19. Hit at High A at young 20.*** Doesn't strike out too much. He does seem to need time to adapt when moved up. His first 40 games at high A weren't great. He's not hitting well in AA now. But he's so young that this can't worry you at all. He's basically one step - hitting well in AA from being considered for a major league trial. If he hits at AA before year's end he probably starts 2018 in everyone's Top 3. Everyone loves his defense as well. He may not hit for power but you are almost as sure of Robles' likelihood at being a productive major leaguer as you can be for a minor leaguer.
Erick Fedde - injury (TJ) slowed down development so aggressively moved through system to get him back on prospect track and he hasn't given any good reason not to - performing at least ok at each stop. He's currently at where he should be to still be a "prospect"- 24 in AAA but is not having a great go at it. It's not as bad as is ERA would have you believe and the IP are very low. However the drop in K rate, which was never lights out, does give you pause. Ideally you'd like to see him finish the year strong, or have a good 2018 in AAA where he's hitting expectations. Failing that he'll start looking like a back-end of the rotation command guy.
Juan Soto - Similar to Robles but a smidge younger. Great GCL performance at an old 17. Hitting in A ball at an old 18. Unfortunately now he's injured. It's likely his performance in 2018 will suffer because of this (that's just typical) leaving him likely in High A in 2019 as well. The good news is that he'll still be in PROSPECT age range then. His defense and speed are in question but if you like low minor stats he's a better hitting prospect than Robles was at that point. Like I said I want to see dominance at these lower levels and that's pretty much what you see here. Nine strikeouts in 109 PAs? It's a big gamble to let him go. At the same time he still hasn't performed above A-ball and with the injury being a 2020 call-up would be an optimistic goal. He's just about to be a big name in the prospect world but he's nowhere near an immediate help.
Carter Kieboom - He was nothing special in rookie ball but blossomed as expected in A-ball at an old 19 making him a PROSPECT. He hits for more power than most at this age, and has managed to cut down on his strikeouts, which looked problematic last year, despite the move up. Both those are encouraging signs. But he's been out since May with a hamstring injury. Seems like most people aren't sold as him as a shortstop which diminishes his value a little bit, and leg injuries this early in development can't help. At this point with the varying minor league performances and the injury he's interesting but I wouldn't pencil him into any future lineups just yet.
Andrew Stevenson - Kind of like Robles light. He's wasn't as young going through levels. Was a young 23 before he got past AA. He didn't hit as well. He's a little more strikeout prone. He doesn't hit for any home run power which you'd like to see by this age. But he's been good eventually at each level, he doesn't strike out too much, and he's fast. People like his range in CF but not his arm too much. I tend to think the high reliance on average will bite him in the majors as the defense improves and the K's go up. And first he has to prove himself in AAA which he hasn't. I'm feeling very strongly that he's a 4th OF type but given his age he's got a couple seasons to prove me wrong. That's his positive right now - still has potential.
Wilmer Difo - Hitting solidly since being put into a starting role. Minor league numbers though have never been impressive. He's a prospect who's generally been floating on by being young without ever being that good. Any strong feelings seem to be based on a good 20 games in High A with the bat as a young 23 year old. He is a great contact bat, but he doesn't walk and the power never developed to the point where it's a big strength. It's hard to believe he will ever really hit in the majors consistently although at a young 25 now there's still a chance. He's fast enough that that can be considered a plus. I've seen his defense. It might be good but it's not going to carry him to a starting position.
Brian Goodwin - Too old to be a prospect now. A good example to look at about hitting a level. In A ball - on the low end of the age range hit great, so was moved up to AA and was briefly a PROSPECT in my mind. but never really got it in AA. Stuck out way too much. Nats tried to keep him a PROSPECT with a move to AAA as a 23 year old but he was close to awful there. Back to AA he went and then back up to AAA the next year more to write him off than anything. He hit better in AAA but not great, he was still on that border where you might expect K issues in the majors and he was no longer young. Despite being a PROSPECT in A ball, his level seems to be around AA/AAA. That's not to say he couldn't hang in limited ABs in the major leagues but he's not much more than a throw in.
Other guys
Pedro Severino - has been PROSPECT young for his level all the way up. Has also been a terrible hitter all the way up with the exception of his very brief time in the majors last year. I have a hard time being excited about a guy who has literally never hit in the minors.
Austin Voth - the reason, at least production wise, to be wary on Fedde. Had a productive year in AAA last season on the lower end of the age range but didn't strike anyone out. This year that's gotten worse and he's just been bad across the board, so much so he's now been demoted. Granted Fedde is a better prospect - he's got much better control. We could look at AJ Cole here, too. Arguably a better prospect than Fedde by production at points and people did like him. But it seems apparent his level is AAA
What does all the above mean? To me it means Robles is a guy you could build any deal around. But that makes him a guy you'd have to be very careful about including. And for the Nats - who need OF help next year probably, I don't see how they trade him. Soto would probably be that type of "any deal" target too if not for the injury. That almost to me, makes him the perfect guy to deal. You have to LOVE what you've seen so far. It's a star track. But it's also a star track way at the beginning and almost certainly slow to arrive. Let someone else ride it out and get some help you can count on for the next few years.
The other guys I don't see any reason why not to stuff them into any deal. Fedde is the hardest one but not because of expected future performance. Instead it's because of a lack of usable starting pitching depth for the Nats. He's arguably it. That makes him unlikely to be traded, unless there is another SP coming back. Kieboom's the only other one that should give you any pause but there's so little to judge there that I don't see how you can get hung up on it. He's just a question mark. The rest aren't even that and should probably not bother you in the least to move.
Have at it.
*This is true for major leaguers as well. The thing is there is nowhere for major leaguers to go. No Super Major Leagues to be bumped up to. So for me the biggest jump, and why I'm wary of prospects until I see them, is the jump to the majors. At each level before you have a mix of players, but the best players get cycled out eventually to be replace with another group to look at. At the majors the best don't cycle out. They sit there providing you with the greatest bump in competition you'll see after getting into the system.
**For example I would have undersold Bryce because he was just barely hitting in AA and AAA. It was still REALLY impressive because was 19 in AAA but still I would have wanted to see production
***Oh I forgot! We've talked about this before but birthdays matter. Especially in the minors. Your age is based on how old you are on July 1st. So a guy born on June 28 2000 would be considered the same age as a guy born on July 2nd 1999 despite being a year apart. A year apart is HUGE when you are young. So to point this out. I separate ages into "young" - which is basically born in April/May/June and "old" which is born in July/August/September.
Of course Dodgers fans hated that original deal too. They felt it was far too much. And this is the dance we go through every year, specifically at the trade deadline. Our guys are too good. Your guys aren't good enough. Of course all any of us have is our opinions and as guys who probably have seen a few games at best of any of these players our opinions aren't going to be as good (we hope) as the scouts and the GMs that do this for a living. Still we can try to inject a little realism into the proceedings.
You are going to find other takes on these guys and you should! But here's how I like to think about prospects. They shouldn't be bad. This seems obvious but a lot of people are willing to overlook something poor thinking it will get better. I think prospects can improve but going from terrible at some point in the minors to good in the majors? You better be a 19yo in AAA. Which brings me to the second point. You should be young for your level. What does that mean. Here's a good chart, courtesy of Nationals Prospects In my opinion, if you are a prospect you should be doing well at the lowest end of these ages. If you are a PROSPECT you should be doing well below these ages. You can certainly develop into a useful player otherwise but with each flip of the calendar those chances diminish quickly. Also you do need to factor injuries into this. Injuries delay progress that the prospect could be making and would be making. Assuming he gets back to health he should just pop back up, behind the original schedule but still there.
A couple more points. I value production at AA and AAA far far far more than I do below that. I am close to dismissive of A and Low A performance unless it is just incredibly impressive. Because of this I probably undersell the youngest prospects. Also I forgive pitchers and catchers a little on the age, but just a year. I hate big strikeout totals for hitters and low strikeout totals for pitchers as those guys can be killed at the major league level. Finally, I don't see defense. Like I have no idea, so I rely on what I hear completely from other places. There really isn't an option for those that aren't going to see dozens of minor league games.
So that's how I look at things. The thing to understand is that everyone has their level at which they stop being a productive player.* We can use how they are doing currently to estimate that but you don't really know until they move up and prove it (or don't) on the field. That's particularly true the younger you go, when there still may be some noticeable physical changes, but it holds pretty much up through your mid/late 20s. Players learn and grow, but in the end everyone has a ceiling.
This is where I stand. It's not perfect but it seems to work ok. You should certainly trust guys who spend more time on this more** but you're here so on to the Nats best prospects.
Victor Robles - He's done everything you want. Dominated GCL to start, and since then he's been hitting while being below the usual low end at each level. Hit at A ball at young 19. Hit at High A at young 20.*** Doesn't strike out too much. He does seem to need time to adapt when moved up. His first 40 games at high A weren't great. He's not hitting well in AA now. But he's so young that this can't worry you at all. He's basically one step - hitting well in AA from being considered for a major league trial. If he hits at AA before year's end he probably starts 2018 in everyone's Top 3. Everyone loves his defense as well. He may not hit for power but you are almost as sure of Robles' likelihood at being a productive major leaguer as you can be for a minor leaguer.
Erick Fedde - injury (TJ) slowed down development so aggressively moved through system to get him back on prospect track and he hasn't given any good reason not to - performing at least ok at each stop. He's currently at where he should be to still be a "prospect"- 24 in AAA but is not having a great go at it. It's not as bad as is ERA would have you believe and the IP are very low. However the drop in K rate, which was never lights out, does give you pause. Ideally you'd like to see him finish the year strong, or have a good 2018 in AAA where he's hitting expectations. Failing that he'll start looking like a back-end of the rotation command guy.
Juan Soto - Similar to Robles but a smidge younger. Great GCL performance at an old 17. Hitting in A ball at an old 18. Unfortunately now he's injured. It's likely his performance in 2018 will suffer because of this (that's just typical) leaving him likely in High A in 2019 as well. The good news is that he'll still be in PROSPECT age range then. His defense and speed are in question but if you like low minor stats he's a better hitting prospect than Robles was at that point. Like I said I want to see dominance at these lower levels and that's pretty much what you see here. Nine strikeouts in 109 PAs? It's a big gamble to let him go. At the same time he still hasn't performed above A-ball and with the injury being a 2020 call-up would be an optimistic goal. He's just about to be a big name in the prospect world but he's nowhere near an immediate help.
Carter Kieboom - He was nothing special in rookie ball but blossomed as expected in A-ball at an old 19 making him a PROSPECT. He hits for more power than most at this age, and has managed to cut down on his strikeouts, which looked problematic last year, despite the move up. Both those are encouraging signs. But he's been out since May with a hamstring injury. Seems like most people aren't sold as him as a shortstop which diminishes his value a little bit, and leg injuries this early in development can't help. At this point with the varying minor league performances and the injury he's interesting but I wouldn't pencil him into any future lineups just yet.
Andrew Stevenson - Kind of like Robles light. He's wasn't as young going through levels. Was a young 23 before he got past AA. He didn't hit as well. He's a little more strikeout prone. He doesn't hit for any home run power which you'd like to see by this age. But he's been good eventually at each level, he doesn't strike out too much, and he's fast. People like his range in CF but not his arm too much. I tend to think the high reliance on average will bite him in the majors as the defense improves and the K's go up. And first he has to prove himself in AAA which he hasn't. I'm feeling very strongly that he's a 4th OF type but given his age he's got a couple seasons to prove me wrong. That's his positive right now - still has potential.
Wilmer Difo - Hitting solidly since being put into a starting role. Minor league numbers though have never been impressive. He's a prospect who's generally been floating on by being young without ever being that good. Any strong feelings seem to be based on a good 20 games in High A with the bat as a young 23 year old. He is a great contact bat, but he doesn't walk and the power never developed to the point where it's a big strength. It's hard to believe he will ever really hit in the majors consistently although at a young 25 now there's still a chance. He's fast enough that that can be considered a plus. I've seen his defense. It might be good but it's not going to carry him to a starting position.
Brian Goodwin - Too old to be a prospect now. A good example to look at about hitting a level. In A ball - on the low end of the age range hit great, so was moved up to AA and was briefly a PROSPECT in my mind. but never really got it in AA. Stuck out way too much. Nats tried to keep him a PROSPECT with a move to AAA as a 23 year old but he was close to awful there. Back to AA he went and then back up to AAA the next year more to write him off than anything. He hit better in AAA but not great, he was still on that border where you might expect K issues in the majors and he was no longer young. Despite being a PROSPECT in A ball, his level seems to be around AA/AAA. That's not to say he couldn't hang in limited ABs in the major leagues but he's not much more than a throw in.
Other guys
Pedro Severino - has been PROSPECT young for his level all the way up. Has also been a terrible hitter all the way up with the exception of his very brief time in the majors last year. I have a hard time being excited about a guy who has literally never hit in the minors.
Austin Voth - the reason, at least production wise, to be wary on Fedde. Had a productive year in AAA last season on the lower end of the age range but didn't strike anyone out. This year that's gotten worse and he's just been bad across the board, so much so he's now been demoted. Granted Fedde is a better prospect - he's got much better control. We could look at AJ Cole here, too. Arguably a better prospect than Fedde by production at points and people did like him. But it seems apparent his level is AAA
What does all the above mean? To me it means Robles is a guy you could build any deal around. But that makes him a guy you'd have to be very careful about including. And for the Nats - who need OF help next year probably, I don't see how they trade him. Soto would probably be that type of "any deal" target too if not for the injury. That almost to me, makes him the perfect guy to deal. You have to LOVE what you've seen so far. It's a star track. But it's also a star track way at the beginning and almost certainly slow to arrive. Let someone else ride it out and get some help you can count on for the next few years.
The other guys I don't see any reason why not to stuff them into any deal. Fedde is the hardest one but not because of expected future performance. Instead it's because of a lack of usable starting pitching depth for the Nats. He's arguably it. That makes him unlikely to be traded, unless there is another SP coming back. Kieboom's the only other one that should give you any pause but there's so little to judge there that I don't see how you can get hung up on it. He's just a question mark. The rest aren't even that and should probably not bother you in the least to move.
Have at it.
*This is true for major leaguers as well. The thing is there is nowhere for major leaguers to go. No Super Major Leagues to be bumped up to. So for me the biggest jump, and why I'm wary of prospects until I see them, is the jump to the majors. At each level before you have a mix of players, but the best players get cycled out eventually to be replace with another group to look at. At the majors the best don't cycle out. They sit there providing you with the greatest bump in competition you'll see after getting into the system.
**For example I would have undersold Bryce because he was just barely hitting in AA and AAA. It was still REALLY impressive because was 19 in AAA but still I would have wanted to see production
***Oh I forgot! We've talked about this before but birthdays matter. Especially in the minors. Your age is based on how old you are on July 1st. So a guy born on June 28 2000 would be considered the same age as a guy born on July 2nd 1999 despite being a year apart. A year apart is HUGE when you are young. So to point this out. I separate ages into "young" - which is basically born in April/May/June and "old" which is born in July/August/September.
Wednesday, July 26, 2017
Redux
Since the All-Star break Strasburg has had issues getting loose, despite not pitching in the game. He's showed a distinct lack of command recently. Strasburg's velocity though remained good so instead of choosing to do an MRI the Nats are hoping just giving him a chance to reset will be enough. It's the prudent thing to do.
Oh sorry. That's not about 2017. That's what happened 11 months ago.
Some people took issue yesterday when I said (on Twitter) that I thought it was obvious that Strasburg's arm wasn't going to hold up. My argument is that last year we saw A B C D and E happen. Strasburg got more rest in the offseason than usual given that he only pitched once for two innings after August 17th. This year we have seen A and B happen. It is not crazy to believe that C D and E will follow. It is not crazy to believe that we will see A and B happen again next year. The counter argument appears to be little more than "maybe not!"
Do I think Strasburg's career is over? No. Do I think he has to miss the rest of 2017? No. Do I think he will miss as much time this year (about a month) as last? Probably so! Do I think that he will have to have some sort of procedure or otherwise exist as a 3/4 of a year pitcher in the recent future? Seems likely!
If this were completely another injury; hip, back, neck, finger, than fine. We don't know. But a forearm injury less than a year after a very very similar set of circumstances and another forearm injury? Please. Once is a chance, twice is a pattern. This is a pattern.
Strasburg may be able to last the year, throw in every start, and be reasonably good. But the smart money can't be on that. The smart money has to be on missed time. The argument should be about how much, not if.
Side Note : Edwin Jackson stinks, but as we discussed Nats will win division. Who the 5th starter is, assuming it's not someone brought in to pitch in the playoffs, doesn't matter. Now should the Nats bring in someone to pitch in the playoffs? I think so. Said that yesterday. If you are on the "Stras will pitch in playoffs and be effective" side - it can be one more pen arm. If you are on the "Stras will miss playoffs" well it's gotta be a starter, right?
Oh sorry. That's not about 2017. That's what happened 11 months ago.
Some people took issue yesterday when I said (on Twitter) that I thought it was obvious that Strasburg's arm wasn't going to hold up. My argument is that last year we saw A B C D and E happen. Strasburg got more rest in the offseason than usual given that he only pitched once for two innings after August 17th. This year we have seen A and B happen. It is not crazy to believe that C D and E will follow. It is not crazy to believe that we will see A and B happen again next year. The counter argument appears to be little more than "maybe not!"
Do I think Strasburg's career is over? No. Do I think he has to miss the rest of 2017? No. Do I think he will miss as much time this year (about a month) as last? Probably so! Do I think that he will have to have some sort of procedure or otherwise exist as a 3/4 of a year pitcher in the recent future? Seems likely!
If this were completely another injury; hip, back, neck, finger, than fine. We don't know. But a forearm injury less than a year after a very very similar set of circumstances and another forearm injury? Please. Once is a chance, twice is a pattern. This is a pattern.
Strasburg may be able to last the year, throw in every start, and be reasonably good. But the smart money can't be on that. The smart money has to be on missed time. The argument should be about how much, not if.
Side Note : Edwin Jackson stinks, but as we discussed Nats will win division. Who the 5th starter is, assuming it's not someone brought in to pitch in the playoffs, doesn't matter. Now should the Nats bring in someone to pitch in the playoffs? I think so. Said that yesterday. If you are on the "Stras will pitch in playoffs and be effective" side - it can be one more pen arm. If you are on the "Stras will miss playoffs" well it's gotta be a starter, right?
Tuesday, July 25, 2017
Do the targets change?
Prior to this weekend I said I wanted the Nats to get another arm for the pen and to kick the tires, so to speak, on trades that would help them beyond 2018. With Strasburg facing some sort of injury review today has my mind changed?
Yes, yes it has.
Relying on Strasburg, Roark, and Gio in 2-3-4 was already a tenuous positions. Injury, past performances, and more recent performance all cast doubt on their ability to perform at a high level come October. You can't erase doubt, but you can try your best to decrease it. At this point that means going after a long term pitching solution. And what does THAT mean? Honestly it means Sonny Gray.
A couple weeks ago I had Gray in there with Gerrit Cole and Dan Straily. Why does it end up being just Gray? Well the Pirates don't seem to be inclined to pack it in for the near future and thus would want to keep an arm like Cole. I don't doubt they could be convinced to part with him but given how he's pitched over the past month they are probably looking for a #1 starter type package. Given how he pitched the beginning of the year, teams including the Nats, are probably looking to give up less. As for Dan Straily, well the Marlins don't have any pitching so to trade Straily would be an utterly confusing move. Cheap and good, if you trade him you might as well trade everyone because you aren't competing until at least 2019. I don't think that's where the Marlins are based on the last couple weeks of talk so Straily comes off the table. I think.
Everyone else able to help the Nats going beyond 2018 will involve taking on some part of a huge salary. I suppose that they could come up with a deal for say a Samardzjia and then agree to a restructuring of it but none of the big contract guys are so appealing that you feel like you are getting a sure thing down the line.
No the answer, if there is to be one, is Sonny Gray. What will it take?
If it's Robles I still balk. As I've explained Robles is a player I'd definitely expect to help the Nats in some manner past 2018. Werth will not be helping past then and Bryce may be gone. Even if he's just an average outfielder you have to hold onto him. That way you can use the cost savings to get someone to help somewhere else. True, you (should) like Gray to be more impactful. Bird in the hand and all. But between a pitcher I feel really good about for 2018-9 and a AA hitter I feel pretty good about through the mid 2020s, I gotta side with the latter.
If it's anything else I probably bite. But being honest, if it's anything else there's a good chance another team could outbid the Nats.
This is where I stand today, not knowing what's up with Strasburg. A "issue of routine" could swing my head back toward the 3rd pen arm being most important. While I still would feel iffy about the playoff rotation, if Stras is healthy you can't ask your team for much more than a Max/Stras 1-2 + competence in a series. And while I would want Nats to look at help going forward, there's always the offseason. Anything worse than that - anything missing time and the above holds.
Yes, yes it has.
Relying on Strasburg, Roark, and Gio in 2-3-4 was already a tenuous positions. Injury, past performances, and more recent performance all cast doubt on their ability to perform at a high level come October. You can't erase doubt, but you can try your best to decrease it. At this point that means going after a long term pitching solution. And what does THAT mean? Honestly it means Sonny Gray.
A couple weeks ago I had Gray in there with Gerrit Cole and Dan Straily. Why does it end up being just Gray? Well the Pirates don't seem to be inclined to pack it in for the near future and thus would want to keep an arm like Cole. I don't doubt they could be convinced to part with him but given how he's pitched over the past month they are probably looking for a #1 starter type package. Given how he pitched the beginning of the year, teams including the Nats, are probably looking to give up less. As for Dan Straily, well the Marlins don't have any pitching so to trade Straily would be an utterly confusing move. Cheap and good, if you trade him you might as well trade everyone because you aren't competing until at least 2019. I don't think that's where the Marlins are based on the last couple weeks of talk so Straily comes off the table. I think.
Everyone else able to help the Nats going beyond 2018 will involve taking on some part of a huge salary. I suppose that they could come up with a deal for say a Samardzjia and then agree to a restructuring of it but none of the big contract guys are so appealing that you feel like you are getting a sure thing down the line.
No the answer, if there is to be one, is Sonny Gray. What will it take?
If it's Robles I still balk. As I've explained Robles is a player I'd definitely expect to help the Nats in some manner past 2018. Werth will not be helping past then and Bryce may be gone. Even if he's just an average outfielder you have to hold onto him. That way you can use the cost savings to get someone to help somewhere else. True, you (should) like Gray to be more impactful. Bird in the hand and all. But between a pitcher I feel really good about for 2018-9 and a AA hitter I feel pretty good about through the mid 2020s, I gotta side with the latter.
If it's anything else I probably bite. But being honest, if it's anything else there's a good chance another team could outbid the Nats.
This is where I stand today, not knowing what's up with Strasburg. A "issue of routine" could swing my head back toward the 3rd pen arm being most important. While I still would feel iffy about the playoff rotation, if Stras is healthy you can't ask your team for much more than a Max/Stras 1-2 + competence in a series. And while I would want Nats to look at help going forward, there's always the offseason. Anything worse than that - anything missing time and the above holds.
Monday, July 24, 2017
Monday Quickie - Next problem up
The Nats won yesterday and the bullpen performed quite well, providing multiple innings and only giving up a couple of runs. The day before that they sealed the deal, a little shakily, in a one-run win. The game before that, with no margin for error they eventually blew the game with a run in the ninth.
All in all it was a series performance you'd probably take every time from the pen.
13IP, 10H, 3ER, 7BB, 16K. That's an ERA of near 2.00 and an acceptable WHIP of 1.31
Of course there is a problem hidden in these stats - the Nats bullpen had to throw 13 innings instead of the ~9 you hope for over a series. What happened? Well I'm sure you know what we're getting at but I don't want to gloss over the first thing that happened. Max went bad for a couple of innings.
Max started his game giving up back to back to back home runs. Over the next 11 batters he'd give up another 4 hits (2 doubles), a walk, a couple of line outs. He turned it around and ended his day striking out the side in the 5th but you can't help but wonder if there's something more here. If it wasn't for Sunday this would be the story going into the week - keeping an eye on Max's next start to make sure this was just one of those blips that happen during the course of a long season.
What happened Sunday was Strasburg left the game after 2 innings. He was a little wild, giving up 3 walks int he first two innings and reaching 3 ball counts which each of his last four batters. Still, it's something pitchers usually work through as a test of how to make it work when you don't have your best stuff. Strasburg though took himself out, so you knew it wasn't just being off. It was confirmed later that he had an problem with his forearm. The positive spin was it was just precautionary, but let's look at just the facts.
Stephen Strasburg has only pitched 127 and 147 innings the past two seasons. He is at 121 for 2017 right now. At the end of 2016, Strasburg had to stop pitching because of a forearm issue, missing most of September and the playoffs. He had mentioned that since the All-Star break he hasn't felt comfortable. (Reminder : he did not pitch in the ASG) He was worried enough about it yesterday to pull himself from a game just 50 pitches in.
Put that all together and you have good reason to worry. About what exactly? Well my first thought is a repeat of last year. Some sort of forearm strain that requires at least a month of rest. If that's it then you hope he's ready to go say... Labor Day weekend. You hope he gets right back to pitching how he has been. You hope that jumping right back into the major league schedule doesn't break him after a couple of starts*.
If you are a pessimist of course the response is Tommy John. That would be terrible given the limited success of the second surgeries. But there wasn't the usual indications in his velocity or breaking pitches that this was the issue. If you are an optimist, its just an issue of routine and some time in his next couple of starts his arm feels where it should be and at worst he has a couple more short outings.
I'll stick with my guess right now - he'll be out for a month or so. But I will add GET A GOD DAMN MRI.
In other news - Enny Romero was also pulled with back issues. That is what got Enny to the DL last year so now it's a persistent problem. Enny was kind of getting some nice praise from fans recently but his season has been one very good month (June) and two and a half bad ones (April, May, July). To me, he's no more reliable today, than he was at the beginning of the year. That doesn't mean he doesn't belong in a major league bullpen. It means though that he should be your last or second last option, working through his issues and trying to max out that talent in innings that don't really matter.
I assume we'll hear today whether he's out or not. You can't really sit on a bullpen injury. Especially this pen
*Remember even though he was deeemed ready enough last year for maybe the NLDS and probably the NLCS he never pitched. So he had all off-season to nurse the injury. We don't really know the effect of coming back in a month to it.
All in all it was a series performance you'd probably take every time from the pen.
13IP, 10H, 3ER, 7BB, 16K. That's an ERA of near 2.00 and an acceptable WHIP of 1.31
Of course there is a problem hidden in these stats - the Nats bullpen had to throw 13 innings instead of the ~9 you hope for over a series. What happened? Well I'm sure you know what we're getting at but I don't want to gloss over the first thing that happened. Max went bad for a couple of innings.
Max started his game giving up back to back to back home runs. Over the next 11 batters he'd give up another 4 hits (2 doubles), a walk, a couple of line outs. He turned it around and ended his day striking out the side in the 5th but you can't help but wonder if there's something more here. If it wasn't for Sunday this would be the story going into the week - keeping an eye on Max's next start to make sure this was just one of those blips that happen during the course of a long season.
What happened Sunday was Strasburg left the game after 2 innings. He was a little wild, giving up 3 walks int he first two innings and reaching 3 ball counts which each of his last four batters. Still, it's something pitchers usually work through as a test of how to make it work when you don't have your best stuff. Strasburg though took himself out, so you knew it wasn't just being off. It was confirmed later that he had an problem with his forearm. The positive spin was it was just precautionary, but let's look at just the facts.
Stephen Strasburg has only pitched 127 and 147 innings the past two seasons. He is at 121 for 2017 right now. At the end of 2016, Strasburg had to stop pitching because of a forearm issue, missing most of September and the playoffs. He had mentioned that since the All-Star break he hasn't felt comfortable. (Reminder : he did not pitch in the ASG) He was worried enough about it yesterday to pull himself from a game just 50 pitches in.
Put that all together and you have good reason to worry. About what exactly? Well my first thought is a repeat of last year. Some sort of forearm strain that requires at least a month of rest. If that's it then you hope he's ready to go say... Labor Day weekend. You hope he gets right back to pitching how he has been. You hope that jumping right back into the major league schedule doesn't break him after a couple of starts*.
If you are a pessimist of course the response is Tommy John. That would be terrible given the limited success of the second surgeries. But there wasn't the usual indications in his velocity or breaking pitches that this was the issue. If you are an optimist, its just an issue of routine and some time in his next couple of starts his arm feels where it should be and at worst he has a couple more short outings.
I'll stick with my guess right now - he'll be out for a month or so. But I will add GET A GOD DAMN MRI.
In other news - Enny Romero was also pulled with back issues. That is what got Enny to the DL last year so now it's a persistent problem. Enny was kind of getting some nice praise from fans recently but his season has been one very good month (June) and two and a half bad ones (April, May, July). To me, he's no more reliable today, than he was at the beginning of the year. That doesn't mean he doesn't belong in a major league bullpen. It means though that he should be your last or second last option, working through his issues and trying to max out that talent in innings that don't really matter.
I assume we'll hear today whether he's out or not. You can't really sit on a bullpen injury. Especially this pen
*Remember even though he was deeemed ready enough last year for maybe the NLDS and probably the NLCS he never pitched. So he had all off-season to nurse the injury. We don't really know the effect of coming back in a month to it.
Thursday, July 20, 2017
Going for it ^= ALL IN
OK it appears that yesterday's post was read as a plea for the Nats to go all in. I'd like to say I don't see where you were getting that - but I can totally see where you were getting that. This is what happens when you run through one draft and a quick editing check. I was hoping that saying that I didn't think the Nats should trade Robles would clarify that point but apparently not. So to clarify
I wasn't saying :
"OMG LOOK AT THE PRECARIOUS SITUATION THE NATS ARE IN FOR 2017! AND THE FUTURE BEYOND 2018 FEELS COMPLETELY UNCERTAIN!!!
THEY NEED TO GO ALL IN!!! LAST CHANCE!"
I was saying
"OMG LOOK AT THE PRECARIOUS SITUATION THE NATS ARE IN! AND THE FUTURE BEYOND 2018 FEELS COMPLETELY UNCERTAIN!!!
It would be advisable if they address at least one of the three potential 2017 issues with a trade prior to the playoffs because while the chance all three come to bear is very unlikely, the chance that one does is not that far-fetched. Better to reduce the odds by attempting to eliminate one. Also, while looking into these issues, I would like it if I saw news that the Nats were addressing them in a way to deal with that uncertain future. I would love it if they could manage to address these issues without mortgaging the future in any significant way."
To put it into practical terms :
Fedde and Soto for Alex Cobb and Jay Bruce? RUN AWAY
Fedde and Soto for Sonny Gray and Andrew McCutchen? I'm listening. Doesn't mean I think this is available or that the Nats would do it but I it's the type of thinking that I want to hear the Nats are doing. Longer term thinking (which I think they do) not necessarily tied to payroll (which I think they are hesitant about)
Hope that makes my point a little clearer.
Another thing I want to note : Somewhere in the comments was a "With Werth gone the Nats have that money (21 Million) to fix some problems" Well... no. We can even ignore the Doolittle/Madson costs for now. Murphy is making 5.5 million more next year - 15.5 Million left. Bryce is making 8 million more. 7.5 million left. Eaton is making 2 million more. 5.5 Million left. Do you want Adam Lind back? Of course you do. He mashes righties. He's due to make 4 million more. It's all gone pretty much! OK so you let Lind walk. Well then, you don't think Rendon (5.8 Million) and Roark (4.3 M) and MAT (580K) won't eat up 5.5 million in arbitration raises? (Spoiler: They will)
And like I said that's before you consider the 12 million that Doolittle and Madson will cost next year. Oh and did I mention the best part? I didn't. Here it is. That 21 million of Werth money is only coming off the books for luxury tax purposes. Werth actually deferred 10 million of his 2016 salary to 2018 so they are only paying 11 million less.
Basically the team you see today? That's the team that will be there in 2018 with some fringy edge changes, unless the team makes a deal or adds more payroll. But it's a good team! A playoff team.
And as for 2019 being cloudy, that's just the truth. The fact that after 2012, that 2013-2015 was pretty clear, and 2016 wasn't completely cloudy is the exception. Often you can't go more than a year or two at the best and feel confident. Three years feeling really confident and one sort of four years out? That's crazy! So 2019 being cloudy doesn't mean anything. It's typical. It's not bleak, it's cloudy. You know what? 2017 was cloudy during 2015. Then Trea Turner kept developing like you'd hope. Then Joe Ross was unexpectedly good to finish year. Then Murphy was signed and magically became an MVP. Then Strasburg signed an extension. Suddenly, by May of 2016, 2017 (and really 2018 too) were pretty clear. It can happen just like that.
So this is not gloom and doom. This is Nats are in a good spot for this year and next and there is the standard uncertainty about the future, which Rizzo and luck worked through once, beyond that.The Nats remain in a good position. I'm hoping Rizzo works and the Lerners pay now to make that true for 2019 and maybe beyond.
I wasn't saying :
"OMG LOOK AT THE PRECARIOUS SITUATION THE NATS ARE IN FOR 2017! AND THE FUTURE BEYOND 2018 FEELS COMPLETELY UNCERTAIN!!!
THEY NEED TO GO ALL IN!!! LAST CHANCE!"
I was saying
"OMG LOOK AT THE PRECARIOUS SITUATION THE NATS ARE IN! AND THE FUTURE BEYOND 2018 FEELS COMPLETELY UNCERTAIN!!!
It would be advisable if they address at least one of the three potential 2017 issues with a trade prior to the playoffs because while the chance all three come to bear is very unlikely, the chance that one does is not that far-fetched. Better to reduce the odds by attempting to eliminate one. Also, while looking into these issues, I would like it if I saw news that the Nats were addressing them in a way to deal with that uncertain future. I would love it if they could manage to address these issues without mortgaging the future in any significant way."
To put it into practical terms :
Fedde and Soto for Alex Cobb and Jay Bruce? RUN AWAY
Fedde and Soto for Sonny Gray and Andrew McCutchen? I'm listening. Doesn't mean I think this is available or that the Nats would do it but I it's the type of thinking that I want to hear the Nats are doing. Longer term thinking (which I think they do) not necessarily tied to payroll (which I think they are hesitant about)
Hope that makes my point a little clearer.
Another thing I want to note : Somewhere in the comments was a "With Werth gone the Nats have that money (21 Million) to fix some problems" Well... no. We can even ignore the Doolittle/Madson costs for now. Murphy is making 5.5 million more next year - 15.5 Million left. Bryce is making 8 million more. 7.5 million left. Eaton is making 2 million more. 5.5 Million left. Do you want Adam Lind back? Of course you do. He mashes righties. He's due to make 4 million more. It's all gone pretty much! OK so you let Lind walk. Well then, you don't think Rendon (5.8 Million) and Roark (4.3 M) and MAT (580K) won't eat up 5.5 million in arbitration raises? (Spoiler: They will)
And like I said that's before you consider the 12 million that Doolittle and Madson will cost next year. Oh and did I mention the best part? I didn't. Here it is. That 21 million of Werth money is only coming off the books for luxury tax purposes. Werth actually deferred 10 million of his 2016 salary to 2018 so they are only paying 11 million less.
Basically the team you see today? That's the team that will be there in 2018 with some fringy edge changes, unless the team makes a deal or adds more payroll. But it's a good team! A playoff team.
And as for 2019 being cloudy, that's just the truth. The fact that after 2012, that 2013-2015 was pretty clear, and 2016 wasn't completely cloudy is the exception. Often you can't go more than a year or two at the best and feel confident. Three years feeling really confident and one sort of four years out? That's crazy! So 2019 being cloudy doesn't mean anything. It's typical. It's not bleak, it's cloudy. You know what? 2017 was cloudy during 2015. Then Trea Turner kept developing like you'd hope. Then Joe Ross was unexpectedly good to finish year. Then Murphy was signed and magically became an MVP. Then Strasburg signed an extension. Suddenly, by May of 2016, 2017 (and really 2018 too) were pretty clear. It can happen just like that.
So this is not gloom and doom. This is Nats are in a good spot for this year and next and there is the standard uncertainty about the future, which Rizzo and luck worked through once, beyond that.The Nats remain in a good position. I'm hoping Rizzo works and the Lerners pay now to make that true for 2019 and maybe beyond.
Wednesday, July 19, 2017
Going for it
Last year the Cubs traded for Aroldis Chapman. Some people didn't like the trade. It's too much. They didn't need him. They were young and good and would be in the playoffs for years to come so why bother?
Fast forward to 11 months later and the Cubs had to streak just to get within three games of the Brewers and are even further out of the Wild Card.
Chances are fleeting. Nats fans should know this. In 2012 they were presented with an amazing situation where due to luck and skill all this talent coming from drafts, trades, and free agent signings coalesced to create what seemed like would be a four to five year window of dominance. To best take advantage of that time frame the Nats sat down Strasburg, saving his arm for the inevitable need in the future. But then the Nats managed to make the playoffs only twice in the next 4 years and even when they did Strasburg was never the tipping point. They won the division with ease and Strasburg made no impact in the playoffs.
The offense, with Werth and Turner and Eaton all currently out, has collapse potential. It would probably take an injury to one of the big three but that wouldn't be unusual as all have recent injury history. The starting pitching, only going 3 deep now and reliant on a Strasburg who hasn't gone beyond 150 IP in a few years and a oddly competent Gio Gonzalez, is worrisome for a playoff set. The relief pitching, was so bad that bringing in two very good arms only gets you back to the point where you probably need one more arm. There are still fixes to be made, if not for starters able to win you a division, then for depth that keeps the team able to compete in case of some bad luck.
You can do the playoff dance again. Get in see what happens. Technically that's your best bet. Nats are all but in now and no longer have a gaping wound on the mound in the late innings. There are no pressing needs. But we don't know what 2018 brings*. We REALLY don't know what 2019 will brings.** I'd have loved to see the Nats make another move or two. Seeing the deal as it went down, it's obvious Robertson was there for a song. Did they let it pass by because of the money? Because they feel they are done?
I'm not advocating selling Robles. Never have (I don't think). He's too good and at this point they need him to come up next year. But there's no one else I feel that way about in the pen. Make some moves. Get some guys who should be good for this year and next and make a full play at the WS title you want before the chances inevitably fade away.
*Really I feel next year is more about the NL East than the Nats who should mostly be similar. It's very likely they don't get the performances from Gio, Zimm, MAT, Lind, that they did in 2017 and Werth could be gone, but a healthy Eaton and Turner likely keeps the offense chugging along as one of the better ones in baseball, and Madson and Doolittle here for another year means the pitching will likely be solid.
**This has the look of the year they will come down, although 2017 had that look too before the Max signing, Stras re-signing, and Murphy becoming a superhero. At this point Gio is gone (always season staff reliable even if I don't trust him for big games), Madson gone, and I wouldn't be surprised if they let Doolittle walk with his injury history. Murphy could be gone - though re-signing is possible. One one hand - this marriage seems to be fruitful for both. On the other, he'll be 34 in 2019. And the big one, Bryce could be gone. Also at this point Max/Zimm are 34. You are really hoping Robles is a star, Turner is a star, they've re-signed someone and that something else has come along. Or the NL East is still garbage.
Fast forward to 11 months later and the Cubs had to streak just to get within three games of the Brewers and are even further out of the Wild Card.
Chances are fleeting. Nats fans should know this. In 2012 they were presented with an amazing situation where due to luck and skill all this talent coming from drafts, trades, and free agent signings coalesced to create what seemed like would be a four to five year window of dominance. To best take advantage of that time frame the Nats sat down Strasburg, saving his arm for the inevitable need in the future. But then the Nats managed to make the playoffs only twice in the next 4 years and even when they did Strasburg was never the tipping point. They won the division with ease and Strasburg made no impact in the playoffs.
The offense, with Werth and Turner and Eaton all currently out, has collapse potential. It would probably take an injury to one of the big three but that wouldn't be unusual as all have recent injury history. The starting pitching, only going 3 deep now and reliant on a Strasburg who hasn't gone beyond 150 IP in a few years and a oddly competent Gio Gonzalez, is worrisome for a playoff set. The relief pitching, was so bad that bringing in two very good arms only gets you back to the point where you probably need one more arm. There are still fixes to be made, if not for starters able to win you a division, then for depth that keeps the team able to compete in case of some bad luck.
You can do the playoff dance again. Get in see what happens. Technically that's your best bet. Nats are all but in now and no longer have a gaping wound on the mound in the late innings. There are no pressing needs. But we don't know what 2018 brings*. We REALLY don't know what 2019 will brings.** I'd have loved to see the Nats make another move or two. Seeing the deal as it went down, it's obvious Robertson was there for a song. Did they let it pass by because of the money? Because they feel they are done?
I'm not advocating selling Robles. Never have (I don't think). He's too good and at this point they need him to come up next year. But there's no one else I feel that way about in the pen. Make some moves. Get some guys who should be good for this year and next and make a full play at the WS title you want before the chances inevitably fade away.
*Really I feel next year is more about the NL East than the Nats who should mostly be similar. It's very likely they don't get the performances from Gio, Zimm, MAT, Lind, that they did in 2017 and Werth could be gone, but a healthy Eaton and Turner likely keeps the offense chugging along as one of the better ones in baseball, and Madson and Doolittle here for another year means the pitching will likely be solid.
**This has the look of the year they will come down, although 2017 had that look too before the Max signing, Stras re-signing, and Murphy becoming a superhero. At this point Gio is gone (always season staff reliable even if I don't trust him for big games), Madson gone, and I wouldn't be surprised if they let Doolittle walk with his injury history. Murphy could be gone - though re-signing is possible. One one hand - this marriage seems to be fruitful for both. On the other, he'll be 34 in 2019. And the big one, Bryce could be gone. Also at this point Max/Zimm are 34. You are really hoping Robles is a star, Turner is a star, they've re-signed someone and that something else has come along. Or the NL East is still garbage.
Tuesday, July 18, 2017
Second half worries
I was going to do this on Friday but it would have interrupted the trade stuff and I wanted to get that out of the way. The Nats have a pretty clear run at the NL East title but that does not mean that they don't have any worries. In fact if you squint hard you can find a worry anywhere.
Catcher - These guys stink. Wieters is hitting a measly .245 / .295 / .377 and since the end of April is "hitting" a "robust" .219 / .246 /.313. That's nearing "Inaugural Guzman" territory. Making things worse is Wieters is not good in the field either making him a complete failure. Making things worse than that, Wieters' god-awful last few months are still better than Lobaton who's hitting .140 / .202 / .267
First base - Zimmmerman's montlhly OPS's
April : 1.345 (AMAZING!!!)
May : .905 (ALL-STAR!)
June : .791 (Solid Starter, though maybe not at 1B)
July : .631 (RIP)
Zimm doesn't field well anymore so if he's not hitting he's not helping and he's not helping right now.
Second base - Daniel Murphy got injured last year. It could happen again. This is also the worry for Third base (Rendon) and Right Field (Bryce)
Shortstop - Trea Turner is out and Stephen Drew (.273 / .309 / .386 - eh) and Wilmer Difo (.258 / .336 / .325 - bleh) are in. Drew is a roll of the dice and Difo hasn't hit well since A+ ball. But you can't also just wait it out because coming back from a broken wrist is not easy. Turner had been hitting better but he still wasn't generating the same power as last year and the wrist means he's unlikely to do so this year either. So BEST case is he comes back healthy and is a good Singly Joe.
Left Field - Where is Jayson Werth? In the midst of capping out the contract with one more miracle year, Werth hurts his toe and is never seen again. As he's aged Weth has been more prone to injury and has found it harder to come back from them so expect that if he comes back he won't be the hitter he was to start the year.
Center Field - MAT looked to be finally settling in to at least a passable starter, if not better and then suffered an oblique injury and will be back who knows when with an injury recovery bat. His replacement Goodwin has shown flashes of impressive play but is hitting .227 / .324 / .420 since becoming a starter. Those aren't starter numbers.
You may ask - if all these guys suck so much why are the Nats crushing it right now? Well Number one - Reds. Number two - here are how Rendon, Bryce, and Murphy OPS'd that series. 2.107, 1.524, 1.500. "Great" you say. "but three guys alone can't do all that damage." You're right. There are other guys hitting really well the past four games. Their names are Adam Lind, Ryan Rayburn, and Chris Heisey. Want to depend on those guys?
Starting Pitching - The Nats don't have a 5th starter and Roark had a terrible June that ended with him being strategically punted out of the rotation for a cycle or two. It is completely reasonable to worry that he won't have any better a second half. Strasburg has two numbers associated with him you should remember - 24 and 23. These are the number of starts he has made the past two years. Gio has been pitching well but we're all waiting for the other shoe to drop on him. Max? Well I suppose he could explode on the mound.
Relief Pitching - The Nats finally have some arms! Doolittle and Madson should be good. But it's relief pitching so they'll throw like 20 innings and there's no guarantee they have to be good. And neither of them were closing games for the Athletics this year. That's not a high bar to jump over. So great stats or not, neither of them might be suited for a closer role either. Despite saving 30 games, the A's did not like Madson as closer. Doolittle is great but has thrown 74 innings in 2 and a half seasons and is probably best used judiciously. There's room for improvement even from here for sure.
Did I properly satisfy the pessimists and nay-sayers? Good.
Now for the optimists - Who cares about this!? The Nats are going to win the division. Enjoy the baseball or go to sleep for two months. Either way it's the Nats in the playoffs back to back for the first time ever and anything can happen once you get in.
Catcher - These guys stink. Wieters is hitting a measly .245 / .295 / .377 and since the end of April is "hitting" a "robust" .219 / .246 /.313. That's nearing "Inaugural Guzman" territory. Making things worse is Wieters is not good in the field either making him a complete failure. Making things worse than that, Wieters' god-awful last few months are still better than Lobaton who's hitting .140 / .202 / .267
First base - Zimmmerman's montlhly OPS's
April : 1.345 (AMAZING!!!)
May : .905 (ALL-STAR!)
June : .791 (Solid Starter, though maybe not at 1B)
July : .631 (RIP)
Zimm doesn't field well anymore so if he's not hitting he's not helping and he's not helping right now.
Second base - Daniel Murphy got injured last year. It could happen again. This is also the worry for Third base (Rendon) and Right Field (Bryce)
Shortstop - Trea Turner is out and Stephen Drew (.273 / .309 / .386 - eh) and Wilmer Difo (.258 / .336 / .325 - bleh) are in. Drew is a roll of the dice and Difo hasn't hit well since A+ ball. But you can't also just wait it out because coming back from a broken wrist is not easy. Turner had been hitting better but he still wasn't generating the same power as last year and the wrist means he's unlikely to do so this year either. So BEST case is he comes back healthy and is a good Singly Joe.
Left Field - Where is Jayson Werth? In the midst of capping out the contract with one more miracle year, Werth hurts his toe and is never seen again. As he's aged Weth has been more prone to injury and has found it harder to come back from them so expect that if he comes back he won't be the hitter he was to start the year.
Center Field - MAT looked to be finally settling in to at least a passable starter, if not better and then suffered an oblique injury and will be back who knows when with an injury recovery bat. His replacement Goodwin has shown flashes of impressive play but is hitting .227 / .324 / .420 since becoming a starter. Those aren't starter numbers.
You may ask - if all these guys suck so much why are the Nats crushing it right now? Well Number one - Reds. Number two - here are how Rendon, Bryce, and Murphy OPS'd that series. 2.107, 1.524, 1.500. "Great" you say. "but three guys alone can't do all that damage." You're right. There are other guys hitting really well the past four games. Their names are Adam Lind, Ryan Rayburn, and Chris Heisey. Want to depend on those guys?
Starting Pitching - The Nats don't have a 5th starter and Roark had a terrible June that ended with him being strategically punted out of the rotation for a cycle or two. It is completely reasonable to worry that he won't have any better a second half. Strasburg has two numbers associated with him you should remember - 24 and 23. These are the number of starts he has made the past two years. Gio has been pitching well but we're all waiting for the other shoe to drop on him. Max? Well I suppose he could explode on the mound.
Relief Pitching - The Nats finally have some arms! Doolittle and Madson should be good. But it's relief pitching so they'll throw like 20 innings and there's no guarantee they have to be good. And neither of them were closing games for the Athletics this year. That's not a high bar to jump over. So great stats or not, neither of them might be suited for a closer role either. Despite saving 30 games, the A's did not like Madson as closer. Doolittle is great but has thrown 74 innings in 2 and a half seasons and is probably best used judiciously. There's room for improvement even from here for sure.
Did I properly satisfy the pessimists and nay-sayers? Good.
Now for the optimists - Who cares about this!? The Nats are going to win the division. Enjoy the baseball or go to sleep for two months. Either way it's the Nats in the playoffs back to back for the first time ever and anything can happen once you get in.
Monday, July 17, 2017
Mad, Son because they do little? Not anymore
The Nats made a deal to fix the pen. How excited should you be? Pretty excited.
The Nats are getting two great arms. Both Doolittle and Madson are having great years and have been consistently very good in recent history.
2017 Doolittle : 0.656 WHIP, 0.8 BB/9, 13.1 K/9
2017 Madson : 0.788 WHIP, 1.4 BB/9, 8.9 K/9
2015-6 Doolittle : 1.101 WHIP, 2.2 BB/9, 10.3 K/9
2015-6 Madson : 1.125 WHIP, 2.4 BB/9, 7.5 K/9
A lefty in Doolittle that is death to left handed batters (no hits to LHB this year) A right hander in Madson who is killer to righties (.177 / .226 / .253). Both though good against all batters. It's hard to see a downside with what the Nats are getting.
Of course we can try. For Madson the worry would primarily be his age. Madson will be 37 soon and has already missed seasons worth of time due to a Tommy John injury. That was a few years ago and Madson has been fine since returning in 2015, but you still have to think of him as an old arm with a TJ surgery in the bank. That's not the best combination. We all saw how Joe Blanton dropped off a cliff dramtically and he didn't have the elbow history. For Doolittle it's injury that should concern you. He has missed time in each of the past three seasons with the dreaded shoulder problems. So far rest has been enough to get him back on track but eventually it won't be. The other thing that might be an issue with Doolittle is that he wasn't all that good a righties last year. Both are over performing as well.
Those are the negatives. For Madson's age it's something to think about but hard to see how that's going to matter now 60% into 2017. I think it he was going off a cliff he would have already. As for Doolittle, yes, that has to always be on your mind, but right now he's healthy and that's what matters most. His RHB numbers were never terrible so he doesn't have to LOOGY it unless he performs worse than usual. And while these two might, probably should, perform not as well as they have been, that really means they should be good to very good instead of great. There isn't much of a downside here for 2017.
So the Nats got two good arms. What did they give up? Well Blake Trienen for one. Based on the news from yesterday everyone lives Blake as much as the Nats did. He does have great stuff. High 90s heavy fastball. That's killer. His BABIP and LOB percentages suggest a bit of bad luck. Last year Blake was one of the better middle relievers in the game. He's not being paid and under control till 2021 (though he is older at 29). Treinen could be very good.
Then again that's ignoring the elephant in the room, Treinen's history of pitching worse in more important situations. If the A's can't fix that the best you can hope for is one of the better 7th inning men in the game and that's not really worth all that much.
Sheldon Neuse is an overall talent who can do it all. Field, hit, run, pop. The question is if this jack of all trades can do any one thing well enough to be impactful. Luzado was a legit prospect who was Tommy Johned into a Nats bargain draft pick. He just came back and has been good but it's real early, he's real young and it's real low level.
Neuse reminds me of Max Shrock, the guy the Nats traded the A's for Repcynski last year. They are early in careers and still on the development path they should be. If they keep on that path, they will become useful pieces. If they surprise, and at this stage/age it's still certainly possible, they could be keystone players. Luzardo is more of an "all or nothing" lowest of the low ball players.* It's the gamble Beane is taking. Instead of taking the Billy Burns - guys you know are bench players or middle relief arms today - you take a chance to get something more. But with players that you like to still be something even if they aren't. It's sound strategy for a middle reliever.
For those that want to add Sonny Gray to the mix, a Sonny Gray would need something more. Something closer to a Robles or Soto. This will be true of nearly any starting pitcher that's not a FA next year or who the Nats aren't eating a large contract for.
This is exciting because the Nats needed multiple bullpen arms, at least two preferably three, and they've already gotten their two without giving up major prospect pieces. For those hoping they can add David Robertson this leaves that possibility completely open. For those hoping they can add another rotation arm, this leaves that open as well.
Could it all fail? Sure. Anything can. But this is a far more sounder plan than relying on two talented guys that ended 2016 injured and a guy with one good year of middle relief in his history. When they all failed it was surprising. If Doolittle and Madson did it would be shocking.
*However give me lefty starters with stuff if you are giving this type of player because I like these guys transitioning into bullpen arms. Luzardo is this type
The Nats are getting two great arms. Both Doolittle and Madson are having great years and have been consistently very good in recent history.
2017 Doolittle : 0.656 WHIP, 0.8 BB/9, 13.1 K/9
2017 Madson : 0.788 WHIP, 1.4 BB/9, 8.9 K/9
2015-6 Doolittle : 1.101 WHIP, 2.2 BB/9, 10.3 K/9
2015-6 Madson : 1.125 WHIP, 2.4 BB/9, 7.5 K/9
A lefty in Doolittle that is death to left handed batters (no hits to LHB this year) A right hander in Madson who is killer to righties (.177 / .226 / .253). Both though good against all batters. It's hard to see a downside with what the Nats are getting.
Of course we can try. For Madson the worry would primarily be his age. Madson will be 37 soon and has already missed seasons worth of time due to a Tommy John injury. That was a few years ago and Madson has been fine since returning in 2015, but you still have to think of him as an old arm with a TJ surgery in the bank. That's not the best combination. We all saw how Joe Blanton dropped off a cliff dramtically and he didn't have the elbow history. For Doolittle it's injury that should concern you. He has missed time in each of the past three seasons with the dreaded shoulder problems. So far rest has been enough to get him back on track but eventually it won't be. The other thing that might be an issue with Doolittle is that he wasn't all that good a righties last year. Both are over performing as well.
Those are the negatives. For Madson's age it's something to think about but hard to see how that's going to matter now 60% into 2017. I think it he was going off a cliff he would have already. As for Doolittle, yes, that has to always be on your mind, but right now he's healthy and that's what matters most. His RHB numbers were never terrible so he doesn't have to LOOGY it unless he performs worse than usual. And while these two might, probably should, perform not as well as they have been, that really means they should be good to very good instead of great. There isn't much of a downside here for 2017.
So the Nats got two good arms. What did they give up? Well Blake Trienen for one. Based on the news from yesterday everyone lives Blake as much as the Nats did. He does have great stuff. High 90s heavy fastball. That's killer. His BABIP and LOB percentages suggest a bit of bad luck. Last year Blake was one of the better middle relievers in the game. He's not being paid and under control till 2021 (though he is older at 29). Treinen could be very good.
Then again that's ignoring the elephant in the room, Treinen's history of pitching worse in more important situations. If the A's can't fix that the best you can hope for is one of the better 7th inning men in the game and that's not really worth all that much.
Sheldon Neuse is an overall talent who can do it all. Field, hit, run, pop. The question is if this jack of all trades can do any one thing well enough to be impactful. Luzado was a legit prospect who was Tommy Johned into a Nats bargain draft pick. He just came back and has been good but it's real early, he's real young and it's real low level.
Neuse reminds me of Max Shrock, the guy the Nats traded the A's for Repcynski last year. They are early in careers and still on the development path they should be. If they keep on that path, they will become useful pieces. If they surprise, and at this stage/age it's still certainly possible, they could be keystone players. Luzardo is more of an "all or nothing" lowest of the low ball players.* It's the gamble Beane is taking. Instead of taking the Billy Burns - guys you know are bench players or middle relief arms today - you take a chance to get something more. But with players that you like to still be something even if they aren't. It's sound strategy for a middle reliever.
For those that want to add Sonny Gray to the mix, a Sonny Gray would need something more. Something closer to a Robles or Soto. This will be true of nearly any starting pitcher that's not a FA next year or who the Nats aren't eating a large contract for.
This is exciting because the Nats needed multiple bullpen arms, at least two preferably three, and they've already gotten their two without giving up major prospect pieces. For those hoping they can add David Robertson this leaves that possibility completely open. For those hoping they can add another rotation arm, this leaves that open as well.
Could it all fail? Sure. Anything can. But this is a far more sounder plan than relying on two talented guys that ended 2016 injured and a guy with one good year of middle relief in his history. When they all failed it was surprising. If Doolittle and Madson did it would be shocking.
*However give me lefty starters with stuff if you are giving this type of player because I like these guys transitioning into bullpen arms. Luzardo is this type
Friday, July 14, 2017
Starting Targets
5.27.
5.01.
These are the ERAs for Tanner Roark and Joe Ross respectively.
4.57.
That was the ERA for Gio Gonzalez last year when we fretted over whether it was a good idea to start him in the playoffs.
The point should be obvious. If we were worried about Gio last year, we need to worry about Ross and Roark this time. Ross is an obvious problem, with his on and off injuries and inconsistency over the past 2 years. But squint and maybe you can see an acceptable season for Roark so far. The problem is that good season was based on an unlucky start. For June and July Roark has earned his terrible season. You can bet on Roark turning it around (and also with Gio continuing to pitch well) or the Nats can go out and get an answer. This may be the year to get an answer.
The foundation guys
Michael Fullmer & Marcus Stroman - It's not that often that top of the rotation guys of these ages (24 & 26 respectively) are available, but the Tigers understand their rebuilding process may take a long time and the Blue Jays would be in the same position if they sell. Stroman's stats aren't as impressive as Fullmer's but Stroman has been doing it longer which reduces the chances he's just a flash in the pan (like the don't strike any one out Fullmer). Stroman has already begun the arbitration process, so he both costs more (3.4M vs 550K for Fullmer), and is under control for less time (2021 vs 2023) But Stroman would still be a great get. Fullmer just has the potential to be a phenomenal one. Either one can be looked at as a solid #2 type for the remaining time under control.
Of course given all that, the deals have to be amazing and it is likely what was offered for Quintana wasn't enough for Fullmer. The Nats would have a hard time offering more unless Robles and Soto both go. The other option would be to eat some contracts. I'm sure the Fullmer deal would be more acceptable if a Verlander or Upton or ZNN were attached. Again, not the Nats way. It's not necessarily the fact the Nats couldn't make a deal like this but getting one of these guys makes fixing the pen harder as you have lopped off the top of your minor leagues and have to be concerned about cutting deeper.
Long term rotation fixes
Gerrit Cole & Sonny Gray & Dan Straily - you have three distinct pitchers here. Gray is an ace type who suffered an injury in 2016 that brought him all the way back down. However, he is apparently recovering and should be good the remainder of this year. Cole is a guy with the best pedigree but has regressed over the past two years and in 2017 is nothing more than an average arm. He's a year younger than Gray but both are under control for the next two seasons and cost under 4 million currently. Dan Straily was a guy with potential who has bounced around several places trying to get healthy and figure things out. It appears that this year he has done it. He's a year older than Gray, but under control for one more season and super cheap 550K.
Straily seems the ideal target for the Nats, but being on the Marlins complicates things. They aren't rebuilding per se and they need pitching so why would they trade this piece? Selling high and getting a great return would probably do it, but I think he's worth more to the Marlins than anyone else. Cole isn't a set piece and the Pirates are not exactly sure where they are, both for this year and the next couple. That means Gray will get the focus as he's doing the best this year and will have the highest price. While these are the standard Rizzo targets I'm not sure the Nats can get these players and unless part of a larger deal (Gray/Doolittle, Cole/Watson) the price still may be too high and might have an adverse effect on the bullpen fixes. Of course the Nats have never been a team to shy away from getting the best player available and hoping everything else works out. So don't rule this out
Long term rotation somethings that cost a lot of money
Johnny Cueto & Jeff Samardzjia & Justin Verlander - I'll put these out there because they are available but I don't see any way the Nats end up with one of these guys. They are all 20+M dollar arms with contracts through 2020 (Verlander) 2021 (Samardzjia) and 2022 (Cueto). None have shown the current performance or stable performance you'd want to even consider bringing in an arm like this. For the Nats to even consider a guy like this it would have to be packaged with something young, cheap, in control, and great (and there aren't many of those) or the selling team would have to eat a ton of money. I don't think SF is there yet. Detroit might do that I guess so if anyone is coming to the Nats I'd bet on Verlander but that's not a bet any one should make.
The no-good-reason names that are out there
James Shields and Edinson Volquez - They aren't cheap (10M, 9M) they aren't young (35, 33) they aren't good now and haven't been good recently. Maybe you grab one to fill out a rotation, but these guys are also under contract for next year too. Sometimes that's a plus, but not here. Pass. Pass hard, pass fast, bump off the road while passing.
The rentals
Alex Cobb & Marco Estrada & Jeremy Hellickson & Scott Feldman & Derek Holland & R.A. Dickey - lots of variation here where you can pick and choose the rental you like the best. Want a guy you might be interested in signing long term? Alex Cobb is your man. Tampa will always sell a FA to be even if they are in contention. Cobb is under 30 and not expensive and if right, he's good. Is he right? That K/9 is low but other things look good. Want just a guy to give you decent innings at the back of the rotation? R.A. Dickey or Scott Feldman should do the trick. Both are having fine years and have been good enough recently that you can feel pretty confident in their performance. Neither are terribly expensive though Dickey (7.3M) is much more expensive than Feldman (2.3M). Just looking for a cheap fill-in to keep your young arms in the minors and your terrible arms wherever it is terrible arms go? Derek Holland is your below average 1.5M dollar man. Want an expensive gamble? Marco Estrada (14.5M) has the recent success that might convince you a change of pace will get him back going. Want an expensive gamble but more risk? Jeremy Hellickson parlayed one good year into a 17.M dollar deal and is currently just filling time in Philly.
Cobb will cost the most because of his value overall and to the team. Everyone else should be available fairly reasonably. If the Nats were just looking for an arm to throw innings to make sure they don't blow the NL East I can see them picking up one of these guys. But I don't think the Nats are in that position. I think they know they can win the NL East with what they have so why bother picking up one of these guys? Still the right deal can make the Nats better for little cost. Personally I'm most interested in R.A. Dickey. That change of pace from the Max/Stras duo would be big, assuming he's not terrible that day.
I think in the end the Nats will kick the tires on Gray and if they can somehow get him and not forfeit the bullpen fixes, they'll do it. Otherwise maybe they bring in one of those fill-in arms acknowledging that it would be better than Cole/Voth/pitching machine they got going now after Ross. There's no real clear favorite among the rentals though. All have plusses and minus and none are guaranteed to be used in the playoffs.
5.01.
These are the ERAs for Tanner Roark and Joe Ross respectively.
4.57.
That was the ERA for Gio Gonzalez last year when we fretted over whether it was a good idea to start him in the playoffs.
The point should be obvious. If we were worried about Gio last year, we need to worry about Ross and Roark this time. Ross is an obvious problem, with his on and off injuries and inconsistency over the past 2 years. But squint and maybe you can see an acceptable season for Roark so far. The problem is that good season was based on an unlucky start. For June and July Roark has earned his terrible season. You can bet on Roark turning it around (and also with Gio continuing to pitch well) or the Nats can go out and get an answer. This may be the year to get an answer.
The foundation guys
Michael Fullmer & Marcus Stroman - It's not that often that top of the rotation guys of these ages (24 & 26 respectively) are available, but the Tigers understand their rebuilding process may take a long time and the Blue Jays would be in the same position if they sell. Stroman's stats aren't as impressive as Fullmer's but Stroman has been doing it longer which reduces the chances he's just a flash in the pan (like the don't strike any one out Fullmer). Stroman has already begun the arbitration process, so he both costs more (3.4M vs 550K for Fullmer), and is under control for less time (2021 vs 2023) But Stroman would still be a great get. Fullmer just has the potential to be a phenomenal one. Either one can be looked at as a solid #2 type for the remaining time under control.
Of course given all that, the deals have to be amazing and it is likely what was offered for Quintana wasn't enough for Fullmer. The Nats would have a hard time offering more unless Robles and Soto both go. The other option would be to eat some contracts. I'm sure the Fullmer deal would be more acceptable if a Verlander or Upton or ZNN were attached. Again, not the Nats way. It's not necessarily the fact the Nats couldn't make a deal like this but getting one of these guys makes fixing the pen harder as you have lopped off the top of your minor leagues and have to be concerned about cutting deeper.
Long term rotation fixes
Gerrit Cole & Sonny Gray & Dan Straily - you have three distinct pitchers here. Gray is an ace type who suffered an injury in 2016 that brought him all the way back down. However, he is apparently recovering and should be good the remainder of this year. Cole is a guy with the best pedigree but has regressed over the past two years and in 2017 is nothing more than an average arm. He's a year younger than Gray but both are under control for the next two seasons and cost under 4 million currently. Dan Straily was a guy with potential who has bounced around several places trying to get healthy and figure things out. It appears that this year he has done it. He's a year older than Gray, but under control for one more season and super cheap 550K.
Straily seems the ideal target for the Nats, but being on the Marlins complicates things. They aren't rebuilding per se and they need pitching so why would they trade this piece? Selling high and getting a great return would probably do it, but I think he's worth more to the Marlins than anyone else. Cole isn't a set piece and the Pirates are not exactly sure where they are, both for this year and the next couple. That means Gray will get the focus as he's doing the best this year and will have the highest price. While these are the standard Rizzo targets I'm not sure the Nats can get these players and unless part of a larger deal (Gray/Doolittle, Cole/Watson) the price still may be too high and might have an adverse effect on the bullpen fixes. Of course the Nats have never been a team to shy away from getting the best player available and hoping everything else works out. So don't rule this out
Long term rotation somethings that cost a lot of money
Johnny Cueto & Jeff Samardzjia & Justin Verlander - I'll put these out there because they are available but I don't see any way the Nats end up with one of these guys. They are all 20+M dollar arms with contracts through 2020 (Verlander) 2021 (Samardzjia) and 2022 (Cueto). None have shown the current performance or stable performance you'd want to even consider bringing in an arm like this. For the Nats to even consider a guy like this it would have to be packaged with something young, cheap, in control, and great (and there aren't many of those) or the selling team would have to eat a ton of money. I don't think SF is there yet. Detroit might do that I guess so if anyone is coming to the Nats I'd bet on Verlander but that's not a bet any one should make.
The no-good-reason names that are out there
James Shields and Edinson Volquez - They aren't cheap (10M, 9M) they aren't young (35, 33) they aren't good now and haven't been good recently. Maybe you grab one to fill out a rotation, but these guys are also under contract for next year too. Sometimes that's a plus, but not here. Pass. Pass hard, pass fast, bump off the road while passing.
The rentals
Alex Cobb & Marco Estrada & Jeremy Hellickson & Scott Feldman & Derek Holland & R.A. Dickey - lots of variation here where you can pick and choose the rental you like the best. Want a guy you might be interested in signing long term? Alex Cobb is your man. Tampa will always sell a FA to be even if they are in contention. Cobb is under 30 and not expensive and if right, he's good. Is he right? That K/9 is low but other things look good. Want just a guy to give you decent innings at the back of the rotation? R.A. Dickey or Scott Feldman should do the trick. Both are having fine years and have been good enough recently that you can feel pretty confident in their performance. Neither are terribly expensive though Dickey (7.3M) is much more expensive than Feldman (2.3M). Just looking for a cheap fill-in to keep your young arms in the minors and your terrible arms wherever it is terrible arms go? Derek Holland is your below average 1.5M dollar man. Want an expensive gamble? Marco Estrada (14.5M) has the recent success that might convince you a change of pace will get him back going. Want an expensive gamble but more risk? Jeremy Hellickson parlayed one good year into a 17.M dollar deal and is currently just filling time in Philly.
Cobb will cost the most because of his value overall and to the team. Everyone else should be available fairly reasonably. If the Nats were just looking for an arm to throw innings to make sure they don't blow the NL East I can see them picking up one of these guys. But I don't think the Nats are in that position. I think they know they can win the NL East with what they have so why bother picking up one of these guys? Still the right deal can make the Nats better for little cost. Personally I'm most interested in R.A. Dickey. That change of pace from the Max/Stras duo would be big, assuming he's not terrible that day.
I think in the end the Nats will kick the tires on Gray and if they can somehow get him and not forfeit the bullpen fixes, they'll do it. Otherwise maybe they bring in one of those fill-in arms acknowledging that it would be better than Cole/Voth/pitching machine they got going now after Ross. There's no real clear favorite among the rentals though. All have plusses and minus and none are guaranteed to be used in the playoffs.
Thursday, July 13, 2017
Starting Offensive Targets
There's a lot of starting pitchers out there! As a break to myself we'll go over the offensive players the Nats could go after first. The same rules apply to today as yesterday. The big difference between relief pitchers and offensive players is that young, good, contract controlled offensive players that have already played in the majors are rarely offered up in trade outside of rentals. That's doubly true mid-season. That means the guys available are usually either old, expensive, or both and also still cost a fair amount in prospects. It doesn't mesh well with the Nats trading philosophy. I believe the best mid-season Rizzo offensive deal was for Kurt Suzuki.
Why is this? Because offensive players are generally more impactful and more reliable. That makes them the players you build around. Relief pitchers are not that. Having a relief problem is bad, but it is solvable through mid-season trade. That can't always be said about offensive problems*
Catchers
Alex Avila & Kurt Suzuki - Hey! Suzuki! Both these guys are FAs next year and making next to nothing baseball-wise in 2017 (2M and 1.2M) Alex Avila is having his best year in a long while and is vastly intriguing because he may be a product of the "launch angle era" He's a player who has always hit the ball hard, and because of it has always had a good BABIP. But being a slow catcher anything on the ground that could be reached was sure to be an out. This year he's hitting far fewer GBs (and striking out less). Of course like any good ballplayer Avila believes that he's just hitting fewer ground balls than he ever has in his career because he's healthy. Sound familiar? If it's real you got yourself a great C bat. Defensively he's good behind the plate but has gone down as a framer in a way that you probably buy it being real. Suzuki is also having a minor resurgence but his is less revelatory. He's hitting more flyballs and a few more left the park than usual. Since he doesn't seem to be hitting the ball harder that's probably more luck than a real change. Which means Suzuki isn't a slightly above average bat but a slightly below one which is unsurprisingly what he's been his whole career.
The Nats are committed to Wieters for another season. They have to be, that's the contract. Because of that I don't think they will make a move at catcher. That's fine as long as Wieters stays healthy. Avila is interesting but a gamble. Suzuki probably isn't much different than Wieters. But Lobaton is a garbage back-up. Back-ups don't play that much so in theory it doesn't matter but if Wieters goes down the Nats are in big trouble.
Outfield
JD Martinez & Andrew McCutchen & Justin Upton & Melky Cabrera & Jay Bruce & Curtis Granderson & Nick Markakis - All these guys are expensive. Let's get that out of the way. We're talking contracts over 10 million which makes it unlikely that the Nats will pick these guys up. Another strike against them is that there isn't a slick fielding CF here,* which is what the Nats need right now if they are going to bother to bring in an outfielder.Why list these guys then? Well because conceivably the Nats could use another OF next year as Werth departs. So grabbing a guy now for then... well it's a classic Rizzo think ahead move. They may like MAT enough not to do this and a Bryce, MAT, Eaton OF would be very solid defensively. Then again a very good and reliable bat might be too much to pass up.
Upton is not coming. He's a good bat and decent enough in the corner but his contract goes on forever. There's no way the Nats will pay it or the Tigers will eat enough of it. Even though you get him next year and the Braves might eat some salary, Markakis makes little sense as he's not good defensively and only average at the plate. Bruce, Granderson, Martinez, and Cabrera are all rentals who head to FA next year. Martinez is the prize - a very good hitter who's been consistent. Bruce and Granderson are what they are - which is dependable. Cabrera is declining but still better than average. None of them, though, are even pretend CFs so picking them up means shifting Bryce. Martinez is probably the only bat you do that for but as the "best available" he will likely go for a lot to someone more desperate for help.
This leave McCutchen. He can play CF. He has bounced back offensively. He has a team option for 2018. The Nats had flirted with getting him and not Eaton in the off-season. If If anyone fits it's Andrew. But do I see the Nats doing it? I don't know. I think if the price is right, they could be tempted. Honestly I don't think the price will be too high but I think the Nats will have expended too much toward pitching to really make an honest play here.
Shortstop
Zack Cozart - It makes sense for the Reds to trade Cozart. He's a FA next year having a career year at 31 out of line with his history. You are trading high on something you very likely won't keep. He's a good defender as well so even if his bat declines in the second half back to his average history you are still getting an overall positive player. Oh, and did I mention he's making relative peanuts (5M) for this package? The good news for the Nats, if they are interested, is that the demand for SSs among contenders is low.** The cost for Cozart should not be pushed up by competing bids unlike starting and relief pitching.
If trading for anything outside of pitching, this is where I see the Nats going toward. You could even stick Trea back in the OF if you needed, when he came back. All this being said the fit is not perfect. I can see them doing this but only if one of two things happen. They totally strike out getting pitching somehow or Turner is not coming back this season. Both these things seems unlikely, so even the best starting offensive target remains a stretch for the Nats which is probably for the best.
*That's Lorenzo Cain who's team right now is not ready to give up
**The same could be said for OFs but you can always stick a McCutchen somewhere or shift your worst fielding OF to DH in the AL.
Why is this? Because offensive players are generally more impactful and more reliable. That makes them the players you build around. Relief pitchers are not that. Having a relief problem is bad, but it is solvable through mid-season trade. That can't always be said about offensive problems*
Catchers
Alex Avila & Kurt Suzuki - Hey! Suzuki! Both these guys are FAs next year and making next to nothing baseball-wise in 2017 (2M and 1.2M) Alex Avila is having his best year in a long while and is vastly intriguing because he may be a product of the "launch angle era" He's a player who has always hit the ball hard, and because of it has always had a good BABIP. But being a slow catcher anything on the ground that could be reached was sure to be an out. This year he's hitting far fewer GBs (and striking out less). Of course like any good ballplayer Avila believes that he's just hitting fewer ground balls than he ever has in his career because he's healthy. Sound familiar? If it's real you got yourself a great C bat. Defensively he's good behind the plate but has gone down as a framer in a way that you probably buy it being real. Suzuki is also having a minor resurgence but his is less revelatory. He's hitting more flyballs and a few more left the park than usual. Since he doesn't seem to be hitting the ball harder that's probably more luck than a real change. Which means Suzuki isn't a slightly above average bat but a slightly below one which is unsurprisingly what he's been his whole career.
The Nats are committed to Wieters for another season. They have to be, that's the contract. Because of that I don't think they will make a move at catcher. That's fine as long as Wieters stays healthy. Avila is interesting but a gamble. Suzuki probably isn't much different than Wieters. But Lobaton is a garbage back-up. Back-ups don't play that much so in theory it doesn't matter but if Wieters goes down the Nats are in big trouble.
Outfield
JD Martinez & Andrew McCutchen & Justin Upton & Melky Cabrera & Jay Bruce & Curtis Granderson & Nick Markakis - All these guys are expensive. Let's get that out of the way. We're talking contracts over 10 million which makes it unlikely that the Nats will pick these guys up. Another strike against them is that there isn't a slick fielding CF here,* which is what the Nats need right now if they are going to bother to bring in an outfielder.Why list these guys then? Well because conceivably the Nats could use another OF next year as Werth departs. So grabbing a guy now for then... well it's a classic Rizzo think ahead move. They may like MAT enough not to do this and a Bryce, MAT, Eaton OF would be very solid defensively. Then again a very good and reliable bat might be too much to pass up.
Upton is not coming. He's a good bat and decent enough in the corner but his contract goes on forever. There's no way the Nats will pay it or the Tigers will eat enough of it. Even though you get him next year and the Braves might eat some salary, Markakis makes little sense as he's not good defensively and only average at the plate. Bruce, Granderson, Martinez, and Cabrera are all rentals who head to FA next year. Martinez is the prize - a very good hitter who's been consistent. Bruce and Granderson are what they are - which is dependable. Cabrera is declining but still better than average. None of them, though, are even pretend CFs so picking them up means shifting Bryce. Martinez is probably the only bat you do that for but as the "best available" he will likely go for a lot to someone more desperate for help.
This leave McCutchen. He can play CF. He has bounced back offensively. He has a team option for 2018. The Nats had flirted with getting him and not Eaton in the off-season. If If anyone fits it's Andrew. But do I see the Nats doing it? I don't know. I think if the price is right, they could be tempted. Honestly I don't think the price will be too high but I think the Nats will have expended too much toward pitching to really make an honest play here.
Shortstop
Zack Cozart - It makes sense for the Reds to trade Cozart. He's a FA next year having a career year at 31 out of line with his history. You are trading high on something you very likely won't keep. He's a good defender as well so even if his bat declines in the second half back to his average history you are still getting an overall positive player. Oh, and did I mention he's making relative peanuts (5M) for this package? The good news for the Nats, if they are interested, is that the demand for SSs among contenders is low.** The cost for Cozart should not be pushed up by competing bids unlike starting and relief pitching.
If trading for anything outside of pitching, this is where I see the Nats going toward. You could even stick Trea back in the OF if you needed, when he came back. All this being said the fit is not perfect. I can see them doing this but only if one of two things happen. They totally strike out getting pitching somehow or Turner is not coming back this season. Both these things seems unlikely, so even the best starting offensive target remains a stretch for the Nats which is probably for the best.
*That's Lorenzo Cain who's team right now is not ready to give up
**The same could be said for OFs but you can always stick a McCutchen somewhere or shift your worst fielding OF to DH in the AL.
Wednesday, July 12, 2017
Relief Pitchers - Targets
There is really no need to go into why the Nats need relief pitching but just in case you are curious : They do have the worst ERA in the majors at 5.20 a good distance from the second worst (DET) at 5.04. Opponents are hitting them the hardest with an opposing OPS of .818, worst in the majors. They've blown 14 saves, which is a lot*, though not worst. This isn't a fluke. This isn't just timing or perception. The bullpen is terrible. It HAS to be addressed.
But who? Rizzo prefers guys who can be long term answers with cost control. The Lerners really prefer cost control. But both showed with the trade for Melancon and Papelbon, that they are willing to go for what they think might be the right short term answer, if it's available. What do we see this year?
Long-term answers, cost controlled
Roberto Osuna & Raisel Iglesias - both these guys are currently closers with solid stats both this year and in 2015/16. Both are controlled through 2020. Both are younger, Iglesias at 27 and Osuna a baby at 22. Osuna is CHEAP only costing 600K right now, while Iglesias, a foreign signing, is a reasonable 5 million or so a year for the next three years. These are ideal targets. That means of course that they will be expensive to get. It's hard to see Robles not being involved here, although if they like Soto a lot (and some do) it could start with him. "Start" is the key word here, though. Any deal centered around something less is you being a homer. It's hard to see Rizzo give up on a bat prospect for an arm so I don't see either of these things happening, but it's at least out there.
Long-term answer, expensive
Mark Melancon - this was the guy the Nats wanted to keep but couldn't as he fled to SF for a more traditional deal. He's hurt. He's not pitching all that well. He's not young (32). And he's expensive (43 mill still owed after this year) But he is a "proven closer" and the Nats have a psychological need as much as a talent one. Still I re-read that last sentence and think the Nats are only in on this if San Fran is giving him away.
Long-term middle relief help, cost controlled
Brad Hand & Arodys Vizcaino & Ryan Butcher - Here we start getting into more likely targets. The first two guys are a couple years into the majors (27 and 26 respectively), with good stats this year, inexpensive (around 1.5M) and controlled through 2019. Brad Hand is the hotness because everyone knows the Padres will deal, however you do have to consider he was no good as recently as 2015. Vizcaino is more reliable but is dealing with a finger issue at the moment. Plus it's unlikely the Braves would trade the Nats a long term piece. Ryan Butcher is an intriguing fellow, with big strikeout potential, a nothing contract (600K), and the longest control of anyone - through 2021. He's also 30, wild, and has limited experience. He's the gamble of the three. Hand will probably get bid up to be more expensive than he's worth so I see the Nats bowing out of that race. I see Butcher as a maybe but he's a 3rd arm dealt for.
Potential long-term middle relief, reasonable
Sean Doolittle - Doolittle is pretty much his own case. He is good, and he has been good. But he's not like these guys as he's under a real contract that will pay him real money. It's only 2.7 mill this year, but it jumps up to 4.4 next and is in the 6 million range in 2019 and 2020. The good news for the Nats is 2019 is a team option, and 2020 might be (mutual if certain things hit). He's had a little injury history but all in all everything here seems acceptable for how the Nats deal. The control, the talent, the injury history keeping trade cost lower than it might be, the fact that he's an A... I like the chances of Doolittle ending up a Nat.
Not just this year - the young and usually cheaper
Justin Wilson & AJ Ramos & David Phelps - These are the guys who the Nats would have control of through next season. Wilson is having the best year but in general has been merely ok. He's a better choice than Phelps, who is around the same cost and age but less successful. Still decent mind you so not a terrible target, but you'd rather have Wilson. Ramos has the better history and is a closer though he's about three times as expensive (6.6M to around 2.6M for the other guys) and is nothing special this year. We're into short term guys at this point so intra-division deals are more possible. Ramos or Phelps would make decent "other arms" to pick up but I feel Ramos will cost a little more than Nats willing to pay giving his closer history. Wilson is a strong possibility
Not just this year - the old and expensive, closer edition
David Robertson & Jim Johnson - These guys fall under ths same category but are on two ends of the spectrum. Robertson is established, having a good year, is younger in this group (32) and has a fairly decent history if you can ignore last year. Johnson is a 34 year old guy filling a role. The target seems obvious, as you can see Johnson age into ineffectiveness next year, but cost matters. Johnson is a 5 million guy next year. Robertson a 13 million one. That number is going to be hard for the Nats to swallow. Still I think they might as I think that they can get Robertson for a reasonable trade deal and he checks off everything they need. Johnson is only an emergency trade target as he's not going to solidify much and you'd be giving the Braves something.
Not just this year - the old and expensive, middle relief edition
Brad Ziegler & Ryan Madson & Jerry Blevins - Blevins is a great LOOGY and isn't old (33) but nothing more. The Nats probably need more flexibility than he can give them. Plus they burnt that bridge when they traded him away in one of the rare Rizzo losses just because he had the audacity to take them through arbitration. Plus I don't see the Mets dealing with the Nats. Ryan Madson is a great arm, even at 36, but to get him you'd have to swallow a nearly 8 million dollar salary next year (and whatever is left on this year). Even though the Nats have been paying more for middle relief that still seems high for them. Brad Ziegler is even more expensive (9 mill next year), older (37), and frankly is skating by on luck so I hope they don't trade for him despite possibly the strongest recent history of anyone in all these lists. Age conquers all. I can see the Nats making a Madson or Zeigler deal only if salary is eaten on the other end.
The rentals
Pat Neshek & Tony Watson & Addison Reed & Joe Smith & Juan Nicasio - I don't care about age as much when we're dealing with guys who will be FAs at the end of the year but it matters a little I guess. Neshek is old (36), Joe Smith and Tony Watson more middling (33, 32) and Nicasio and Reed are on the younger side (30, 28). Reed would honestly be a great get. He's consistently been a very good reliever for a while now. Even factoring in the largest contract here (nearly 8 million this year) I think it's worth it. Problem is it's the Mets and again I don't see that happening. Failing that, Neshek is having the best year but is the next most expensive at 6.5 million. Watson is still good but seems to be on a down turn and is over 5.5 million. Nicasio has a spotty history but we're getting more toward salaries that even the Nats can just ignore (or get the other team to easily eat) at 3.7 for the year. And that leads us to probably the best bargain of the group Joe Smith. I know I said I don't think TOR will sell and I don't, but trading a "FA to be" is different. Joe Smith isn't going to set the world on fire, but he's exactly the type of reliable veteran presence the Nats need. The problem is he's dealing with shoulder inflammation. But the way I see it is that that only makes him more affordable. Since the Nats need to fill up the pen with new blood it makes him the perfect 3rd arm gamble.
Conclusions : So today I think the Nats end up with Robertson, Doolittle, and Joe Smith. Note that this changes daily but I think they CAN get Robertson (unlike Osuna or Iglesias) without giving up too much and he gives them exactly what they need at the back of the pen. Doolittle just makes too much sense with his talent, affordable deal and lots of team control potential. Smith fits in as a third arm to throw in the mix for little to get as much stability through new faces as they can get. Though honestly this spot could be anyone I named above. In my mind it would be the cheapest 3rd arm they can get who is above average this year and not expensive.
This makes two guesses in a row involving Doolittle so I guess I see him as the most likely get.
*NL blown saves leaders - 1st ATL, 2nd 3-way tie PHI MIA WSN, 3rd 2-way tie NYM MIL. NL EAST FOREVER
But who? Rizzo prefers guys who can be long term answers with cost control. The Lerners really prefer cost control. But both showed with the trade for Melancon and Papelbon, that they are willing to go for what they think might be the right short term answer, if it's available. What do we see this year?
Long-term answers, cost controlled
Roberto Osuna & Raisel Iglesias - both these guys are currently closers with solid stats both this year and in 2015/16. Both are controlled through 2020. Both are younger, Iglesias at 27 and Osuna a baby at 22. Osuna is CHEAP only costing 600K right now, while Iglesias, a foreign signing, is a reasonable 5 million or so a year for the next three years. These are ideal targets. That means of course that they will be expensive to get. It's hard to see Robles not being involved here, although if they like Soto a lot (and some do) it could start with him. "Start" is the key word here, though. Any deal centered around something less is you being a homer. It's hard to see Rizzo give up on a bat prospect for an arm so I don't see either of these things happening, but it's at least out there.
Long-term answer, expensive
Mark Melancon - this was the guy the Nats wanted to keep but couldn't as he fled to SF for a more traditional deal. He's hurt. He's not pitching all that well. He's not young (32). And he's expensive (43 mill still owed after this year) But he is a "proven closer" and the Nats have a psychological need as much as a talent one. Still I re-read that last sentence and think the Nats are only in on this if San Fran is giving him away.
Long-term middle relief help, cost controlled
Brad Hand & Arodys Vizcaino & Ryan Butcher - Here we start getting into more likely targets. The first two guys are a couple years into the majors (27 and 26 respectively), with good stats this year, inexpensive (around 1.5M) and controlled through 2019. Brad Hand is the hotness because everyone knows the Padres will deal, however you do have to consider he was no good as recently as 2015. Vizcaino is more reliable but is dealing with a finger issue at the moment. Plus it's unlikely the Braves would trade the Nats a long term piece. Ryan Butcher is an intriguing fellow, with big strikeout potential, a nothing contract (600K), and the longest control of anyone - through 2021. He's also 30, wild, and has limited experience. He's the gamble of the three. Hand will probably get bid up to be more expensive than he's worth so I see the Nats bowing out of that race. I see Butcher as a maybe but he's a 3rd arm dealt for.
Potential long-term middle relief, reasonable
Sean Doolittle - Doolittle is pretty much his own case. He is good, and he has been good. But he's not like these guys as he's under a real contract that will pay him real money. It's only 2.7 mill this year, but it jumps up to 4.4 next and is in the 6 million range in 2019 and 2020. The good news for the Nats is 2019 is a team option, and 2020 might be (mutual if certain things hit). He's had a little injury history but all in all everything here seems acceptable for how the Nats deal. The control, the talent, the injury history keeping trade cost lower than it might be, the fact that he's an A... I like the chances of Doolittle ending up a Nat.
Not just this year - the young and usually cheaper
Justin Wilson & AJ Ramos & David Phelps - These are the guys who the Nats would have control of through next season. Wilson is having the best year but in general has been merely ok. He's a better choice than Phelps, who is around the same cost and age but less successful. Still decent mind you so not a terrible target, but you'd rather have Wilson. Ramos has the better history and is a closer though he's about three times as expensive (6.6M to around 2.6M for the other guys) and is nothing special this year. We're into short term guys at this point so intra-division deals are more possible. Ramos or Phelps would make decent "other arms" to pick up but I feel Ramos will cost a little more than Nats willing to pay giving his closer history. Wilson is a strong possibility
Not just this year - the old and expensive, closer edition
David Robertson & Jim Johnson - These guys fall under ths same category but are on two ends of the spectrum. Robertson is established, having a good year, is younger in this group (32) and has a fairly decent history if you can ignore last year. Johnson is a 34 year old guy filling a role. The target seems obvious, as you can see Johnson age into ineffectiveness next year, but cost matters. Johnson is a 5 million guy next year. Robertson a 13 million one. That number is going to be hard for the Nats to swallow. Still I think they might as I think that they can get Robertson for a reasonable trade deal and he checks off everything they need. Johnson is only an emergency trade target as he's not going to solidify much and you'd be giving the Braves something.
Not just this year - the old and expensive, middle relief edition
Brad Ziegler & Ryan Madson & Jerry Blevins - Blevins is a great LOOGY and isn't old (33) but nothing more. The Nats probably need more flexibility than he can give them. Plus they burnt that bridge when they traded him away in one of the rare Rizzo losses just because he had the audacity to take them through arbitration. Plus I don't see the Mets dealing with the Nats. Ryan Madson is a great arm, even at 36, but to get him you'd have to swallow a nearly 8 million dollar salary next year (and whatever is left on this year). Even though the Nats have been paying more for middle relief that still seems high for them. Brad Ziegler is even more expensive (9 mill next year), older (37), and frankly is skating by on luck so I hope they don't trade for him despite possibly the strongest recent history of anyone in all these lists. Age conquers all. I can see the Nats making a Madson or Zeigler deal only if salary is eaten on the other end.
The rentals
Pat Neshek & Tony Watson & Addison Reed & Joe Smith & Juan Nicasio - I don't care about age as much when we're dealing with guys who will be FAs at the end of the year but it matters a little I guess. Neshek is old (36), Joe Smith and Tony Watson more middling (33, 32) and Nicasio and Reed are on the younger side (30, 28). Reed would honestly be a great get. He's consistently been a very good reliever for a while now. Even factoring in the largest contract here (nearly 8 million this year) I think it's worth it. Problem is it's the Mets and again I don't see that happening. Failing that, Neshek is having the best year but is the next most expensive at 6.5 million. Watson is still good but seems to be on a down turn and is over 5.5 million. Nicasio has a spotty history but we're getting more toward salaries that even the Nats can just ignore (or get the other team to easily eat) at 3.7 for the year. And that leads us to probably the best bargain of the group Joe Smith. I know I said I don't think TOR will sell and I don't, but trading a "FA to be" is different. Joe Smith isn't going to set the world on fire, but he's exactly the type of reliable veteran presence the Nats need. The problem is he's dealing with shoulder inflammation. But the way I see it is that that only makes him more affordable. Since the Nats need to fill up the pen with new blood it makes him the perfect 3rd arm gamble.
Conclusions : So today I think the Nats end up with Robertson, Doolittle, and Joe Smith. Note that this changes daily but I think they CAN get Robertson (unlike Osuna or Iglesias) without giving up too much and he gives them exactly what they need at the back of the pen. Doolittle just makes too much sense with his talent, affordable deal and lots of team control potential. Smith fits in as a third arm to throw in the mix for little to get as much stability through new faces as they can get. Though honestly this spot could be anyone I named above. In my mind it would be the cheapest 3rd arm they can get who is above average this year and not expensive.
This makes two guesses in a row involving Doolittle so I guess I see him as the most likely get.
*NL blown saves leaders - 1st ATL, 2nd 3-way tie PHI MIA WSN, 3rd 2-way tie NYM MIL. NL EAST FOREVER
Monday, July 10, 2017
Trade Targets
Here we are. The All-Star break. The Nats haven't made it intact but in the past week they have proved that at the very least they are still no worse than the next best teams in the NL East and that is more than enough. Even if you hate the current MASH unit Nats and think they are equal to the rest of the dregs of the division, that still means the rest of the dregs have to play 10 games better than the Nats over the course of 75 games or so.
That may not sound like a lot but it is. Take a look at the standings. Only in eight instances has a team put 10 games between them and another team so far. And that's considering all the teams, with all their differences in talent, in more games. Nope the Nats are safe (until Scherzer and Bryce go base jumping) and we can turn our heads to the future now and that means fixing the Nats current issues.
That means trades for relievers, obviously. But it could also mean a trade for a starter. Ross has gone down with some ailment and hadn't been reliable before that. Roark is hanging on this season. Do you trust Gio in a big spot in the playoffs? It could also mean a trade for a catcher. Wieters/Lobaton could be the worst catching duo in the majors this year. It could mean a 3rd OF. MAT is now out and with no time table for return. Werth is still out and is 1000 years old in baseball years. Goodwin is hanging on by his fingernails right now as his stats keep on slipping, slipping, slipping into the 5th outfielder future. It could even mean a new SS as Trea Turner should be back but if the right deal is there, how do you turn it down?
So the Nats, who say a month ago might have been only focused on relievers are now open for business across the board. What do the standings say about who's selling.
No: BOS, NYY, CLE, MIN, KCR, HOU, WSN, MIL, LAD, ARI
Prob Not : TEX, CHC, COL, NYM, TBR
? : STL, TOR, SEA
Prob Yes : LAA, ATL, PIT
Yes : CHW, OAK, DET, SFG, SDP, CIN, PHI, MIA
Doesn't matter, won't trade with Nats : BAL (Mets probably fit here too)
This is just my take based on what I've read and believe. Vaguely this reads as : teams currently in strong contention for a division title won't sell. Teams in WC contention, or teams that feel built for now even if year has gotten away from them, probably won't sell. Teams that aren't built for this year, but are on the fringes of playoff contentions, probably will sell. Teams that are in contention for nothing, will sell. Basically it's a combination of where you are, where you are trending, and what you felt going into the year. Also this list isn't set, things could change with a dramatic run or fall in the week or two after the ASB.
Anyway those the teams. Who are the players? We'll start going over that in detail tomorrow but a non-exhaustive list includes...
RP: Melancon (SFG), Doolittle (OAK) Wilson (DET), Neshek (PHI), Ramos (MIA), Robertson (CHW), Hand (SDP), Madson (OAK), Blevins (NYM), Johnson (ATL), Watson (PIT), Reed (NYM), Vizcaino (ATL), Smith (TOR), Nicasio (PIT) Cuthcer (SDP),
SP: Stroman (TOR), Cobb (TBR), Cole (PIT), Quitana (CHW),Shields (CHW), Cueto (SFG), Samardzjia (SFG), Verlander (DET), Gray (OAK), Lynn (STL), Estrada (TOR), Hellickson (PHI), Volquez (MIA), Straily (MIA), Feldman (CIN), Holland (CHW), Dickey (ATL)
C: Avila (DET), Suzuki (ATL)
OF: Martinez (DET), McCutchen (PIT), Upton (DET), Cabrera (CHW), Bruce (NYM), Granderson (NYM), Markakis (ATL)
SS: Cozart (CIN)
What we see here is some hard truths. There are very few impact players available this year. Relief wise there are no shutdown relief types with a history of saves out there for the Nats. There are still good arms and a reliable save guy or two but not that big name. That could be good as the Nats don't have a deep system to trade from, but it could be bad because usually the prices stay relatively high for the best available. Notice the depth here takes a hit though if you pull the Mets and Braves out. Since they likely are looking to 2018 they would have to win this trade or give the Nats someone that's a FA next year. Neither of those ideas match up with Rizzo's trade history.
On the starter side, what it lacks in stars, it makes up for in quality. If it were a normal season I'd fully expect the Nats to flip for one of these guys with a couple years of control. The bats are weak in the areas the Nats may pursue. Catcher is extremely limited and with Wieters basically set for next year too I don't see them going for that. SS is basically one player (unless you want AsCab back) so cost will be high and it was a stretch to begin with so that's probably out. Outfield is the only one I see as a maybe but with all the high salaries here I'm not sure the Nats will find a partner. They'll be wanting the other team to eat a lot of cash. The other team will only do that for better prospects and the Nats probably won't sell the ones that matter.
OK so fill in any names you think are worth talking about. Tomorrow we go through relief arms.
That may not sound like a lot but it is. Take a look at the standings. Only in eight instances has a team put 10 games between them and another team so far. And that's considering all the teams, with all their differences in talent, in more games. Nope the Nats are safe (until Scherzer and Bryce go base jumping) and we can turn our heads to the future now and that means fixing the Nats current issues.
That means trades for relievers, obviously. But it could also mean a trade for a starter. Ross has gone down with some ailment and hadn't been reliable before that. Roark is hanging on this season. Do you trust Gio in a big spot in the playoffs? It could also mean a trade for a catcher. Wieters/Lobaton could be the worst catching duo in the majors this year. It could mean a 3rd OF. MAT is now out and with no time table for return. Werth is still out and is 1000 years old in baseball years. Goodwin is hanging on by his fingernails right now as his stats keep on slipping, slipping, slipping into the 5th outfielder future. It could even mean a new SS as Trea Turner should be back but if the right deal is there, how do you turn it down?
So the Nats, who say a month ago might have been only focused on relievers are now open for business across the board. What do the standings say about who's selling.
No: BOS, NYY, CLE, MIN, KCR, HOU, WSN, MIL, LAD, ARI
Prob Not : TEX, CHC, COL, NYM, TBR
? : STL, TOR, SEA
Prob Yes : LAA, ATL, PIT
Yes : CHW, OAK, DET, SFG, SDP, CIN, PHI, MIA
Doesn't matter, won't trade with Nats : BAL (Mets probably fit here too)
This is just my take based on what I've read and believe. Vaguely this reads as : teams currently in strong contention for a division title won't sell. Teams in WC contention, or teams that feel built for now even if year has gotten away from them, probably won't sell. Teams that aren't built for this year, but are on the fringes of playoff contentions, probably will sell. Teams that are in contention for nothing, will sell. Basically it's a combination of where you are, where you are trending, and what you felt going into the year. Also this list isn't set, things could change with a dramatic run or fall in the week or two after the ASB.
Anyway those the teams. Who are the players? We'll start going over that in detail tomorrow but a non-exhaustive list includes...
RP: Melancon (SFG), Doolittle (OAK) Wilson (DET), Neshek (PHI), Ramos (MIA), Robertson (CHW), Hand (SDP), Madson (OAK), Blevins (NYM), Johnson (ATL), Watson (PIT), Reed (NYM), Vizcaino (ATL), Smith (TOR), Nicasio (PIT) Cuthcer (SDP),
SP: Stroman (TOR), Cobb (TBR), Cole (PIT), Quitana (CHW),Shields (CHW), Cueto (SFG), Samardzjia (SFG), Verlander (DET), Gray (OAK), Lynn (STL), Estrada (TOR), Hellickson (PHI), Volquez (MIA), Straily (MIA), Feldman (CIN), Holland (CHW), Dickey (ATL)
C: Avila (DET), Suzuki (ATL)
OF: Martinez (DET), McCutchen (PIT), Upton (DET), Cabrera (CHW), Bruce (NYM), Granderson (NYM), Markakis (ATL)
SS: Cozart (CIN)
What we see here is some hard truths. There are very few impact players available this year. Relief wise there are no shutdown relief types with a history of saves out there for the Nats. There are still good arms and a reliable save guy or two but not that big name. That could be good as the Nats don't have a deep system to trade from, but it could be bad because usually the prices stay relatively high for the best available. Notice the depth here takes a hit though if you pull the Mets and Braves out. Since they likely are looking to 2018 they would have to win this trade or give the Nats someone that's a FA next year. Neither of those ideas match up with Rizzo's trade history.
On the starter side, what it lacks in stars, it makes up for in quality. If it were a normal season I'd fully expect the Nats to flip for one of these guys with a couple years of control. The bats are weak in the areas the Nats may pursue. Catcher is extremely limited and with Wieters basically set for next year too I don't see them going for that. SS is basically one player (unless you want AsCab back) so cost will be high and it was a stretch to begin with so that's probably out. Outfield is the only one I see as a maybe but with all the high salaries here I'm not sure the Nats will find a partner. They'll be wanting the other team to eat a lot of cash. The other team will only do that for better prospects and the Nats probably won't sell the ones that matter.
OK so fill in any names you think are worth talking about. Tomorrow we go through relief arms.
Friday, July 07, 2017
Braves not done
At least not yet but they could be by the next time we get together in our little corner of the internet.
Unfortunately, losing your lead-off hitter and starting shortstop for a very long stretch changes things, and losing your streaking currently starting CF only adds to it. The Nats are now a different team from two weeks ago and thus they still have a division to win. But they could still do it relatively soon. Like this weekend.
Are the Braves a real threat? They do have a legitimite superstar in Freddie Freeman, a player good enough that they didn't dump him along with everyone else in their rebuilding effort a few years ago. He's back from injury and looks fine. Everything else though is a little suspect.
The next best bat in the lineup is Freddie's injury replacement Matt Adams, which is why Freddie is trying out 3B right now. Adams has been underrated in my opinion as a first baseman but his fatal flaw, that he can't hit lefties, can't be ignored. You can work around that somewhat but ideally he should be platooned. After that it's Matt Kemp who has been a solid hitter all his career. He should keep hitting, but he should also provide the Braves with a big sucking hole in the outfield. For whatever reason Tyler Flowers has blossomed in Atlanta and Kurt Suzuki is nothing if not a reliable back-up, making the bat at catcher an overall plus. You don't want to have to count on these guys to keep being above average but the Braves almost have to because this is the end of the above average bats on the team
Next come the average guys. The good news is that there is no reason to think these guys will falter in the 2nd half. The bad news is there is no reason to think they'll do better either. Phillips, Inciarte, and Markakis are all average bats who have been average bats for a while.
Who's left? The guy that's probably the key to the Braves 2nd half, Dansby Swanson. He came out impressively last year putting up a line of .302 / .361 / .442 in his first 38 games but started amazingly bad in 2017. He was hitting as low as .134 / .184 / .183 a month into the season and was still putting up an abysmal .193 / .276 / .301 line as late as June 6th. If he hits like he did in June, which was a lot like his 2016, the Braves have a chance to be a decent offense. If not they'll struggle to be average.
Can then they be carried to something greater by their pitching? It isn't likely. There was hope that if the Braves stabilized the back of the rotation with Dickey and Colon that Teheran and Garcia would provide a solid 1-2 and a young arm would emerge to round out the rotation. The only thing that worked out was Dickey being a stable #4 type. Colon was so bad he's already gone and Teheran and Garcia have both had major issues this year, especially recently. No young arm emerged as first choice Foltynewicz has been fair at best. That might be changing, he's had a better June, and Sean Newcomb looks ok, but the reality is that neither looks good enough to carry the team. The best case scenario looks to be a 1-5 that resembles a 3-3-3-3-3.
That leaves the bullpen to be the saving grace but again there isn't much to see here. Jim Johnson is the guy that proves the rule that Blake Treinen is an exception to. Anyone can go out and be a closer. He's not great but he can get 3 outs more often than not. Jose Ramirez is their most effective arm but he's not special. Motte is a now a lighter version of Ramirez. There isn't any depth here as after that you get more and more blah arms that can't strike out anyone, walk too many, and unlike Motte and Ramirez, get hit all tht time. So they can hold onto a lead here and there, but the middle innings will suffer and they can't keep it going multiple games in a row.
Oh maybe defense then? Nah. Braves are good but not special. The infield defense is solid, which is why guys like Ramirez and Motte can succeed, but the OF defense can be pretty horrid as Markakis and Kemp have aged into the same territory Werth lives in.
The Nats may have suffered enough injury losses now to bring them back down to the rest of the NL East. I think it's fair to believe something like that. However they also have a huge lead so the rest of the NL East can't simply play as well as the Nats, they have to play much much better. Given their complete inability to keep their rotation healthy I can't see the Mets doing it. Can the Braves do it? I don't see that either. I suppose if Swanson is a 2nd half star and Teheran finds himself again then maybe. But they need both those things to happen. AND they need to not let the division get away from them over the next three days. If they can take 2 of the next three I suppose it forces you to keep that eye on them 8.5 out, but only barely. If they can't do that then the Nats remain in cruise control. That is until the next handful of guys go down to injury.
Unfortunately, losing your lead-off hitter and starting shortstop for a very long stretch changes things, and losing your streaking currently starting CF only adds to it. The Nats are now a different team from two weeks ago and thus they still have a division to win. But they could still do it relatively soon. Like this weekend.
Are the Braves a real threat? They do have a legitimite superstar in Freddie Freeman, a player good enough that they didn't dump him along with everyone else in their rebuilding effort a few years ago. He's back from injury and looks fine. Everything else though is a little suspect.
The next best bat in the lineup is Freddie's injury replacement Matt Adams, which is why Freddie is trying out 3B right now. Adams has been underrated in my opinion as a first baseman but his fatal flaw, that he can't hit lefties, can't be ignored. You can work around that somewhat but ideally he should be platooned. After that it's Matt Kemp who has been a solid hitter all his career. He should keep hitting, but he should also provide the Braves with a big sucking hole in the outfield. For whatever reason Tyler Flowers has blossomed in Atlanta and Kurt Suzuki is nothing if not a reliable back-up, making the bat at catcher an overall plus. You don't want to have to count on these guys to keep being above average but the Braves almost have to because this is the end of the above average bats on the team
Next come the average guys. The good news is that there is no reason to think these guys will falter in the 2nd half. The bad news is there is no reason to think they'll do better either. Phillips, Inciarte, and Markakis are all average bats who have been average bats for a while.
Who's left? The guy that's probably the key to the Braves 2nd half, Dansby Swanson. He came out impressively last year putting up a line of .302 / .361 / .442 in his first 38 games but started amazingly bad in 2017. He was hitting as low as .134 / .184 / .183 a month into the season and was still putting up an abysmal .193 / .276 / .301 line as late as June 6th. If he hits like he did in June, which was a lot like his 2016, the Braves have a chance to be a decent offense. If not they'll struggle to be average.
Can then they be carried to something greater by their pitching? It isn't likely. There was hope that if the Braves stabilized the back of the rotation with Dickey and Colon that Teheran and Garcia would provide a solid 1-2 and a young arm would emerge to round out the rotation. The only thing that worked out was Dickey being a stable #4 type. Colon was so bad he's already gone and Teheran and Garcia have both had major issues this year, especially recently. No young arm emerged as first choice Foltynewicz has been fair at best. That might be changing, he's had a better June, and Sean Newcomb looks ok, but the reality is that neither looks good enough to carry the team. The best case scenario looks to be a 1-5 that resembles a 3-3-3-3-3.
That leaves the bullpen to be the saving grace but again there isn't much to see here. Jim Johnson is the guy that proves the rule that Blake Treinen is an exception to. Anyone can go out and be a closer. He's not great but he can get 3 outs more often than not. Jose Ramirez is their most effective arm but he's not special. Motte is a now a lighter version of Ramirez. There isn't any depth here as after that you get more and more blah arms that can't strike out anyone, walk too many, and unlike Motte and Ramirez, get hit all tht time. So they can hold onto a lead here and there, but the middle innings will suffer and they can't keep it going multiple games in a row.
Oh maybe defense then? Nah. Braves are good but not special. The infield defense is solid, which is why guys like Ramirez and Motte can succeed, but the OF defense can be pretty horrid as Markakis and Kemp have aged into the same territory Werth lives in.
The Nats may have suffered enough injury losses now to bring them back down to the rest of the NL East. I think it's fair to believe something like that. However they also have a huge lead so the rest of the NL East can't simply play as well as the Nats, they have to play much much better. Given their complete inability to keep their rotation healthy I can't see the Mets doing it. Can the Braves do it? I don't see that either. I suppose if Swanson is a 2nd half star and Teheran finds himself again then maybe. But they need both those things to happen. AND they need to not let the division get away from them over the next three days. If they can take 2 of the next three I suppose it forces you to keep that eye on them 8.5 out, but only barely. If they can't do that then the Nats remain in cruise control. That is until the next handful of guys go down to injury.
Wednesday, July 05, 2017
Mets done
The Mets aren't going to pass the Nats in the standings. This shouldn't be surprising but I guess in some ways we are always looking for the path to failure.
The Mets lost Monday's game more than the Nats won it. Although we should all tip the hat to Strasburg for pitching like he did. Honestly though, when it comes down to the Nats bullpen versus anyone else's bullpen the Nats should lose. However, Terry Collins left super effective LOOGY Jerry Blevins (.155 / .211 / .169 vs LHB this year) in to face MAT. Trouble is MAT bats right-handed and Blevins is .343 / .489 / .686 vs RHB this year. Yeah MAT's homer is in there but I hope you can see it was a bad idea. Few pitches later MAT homers, Nats have a cushion that they can blow, which of course they do, without losing the game. Then when a big out is needed Collins goes with Fernando Salas (Curently sporting a 6.31 ERA) instead of Addison Reed (2.59) because Reed is the closer and the Nats win! MVP Terry Collins!
Yesterday the Nats won it. Ross didn't pitch well* but got a lot of luck and his typical 40 runs of support. Yes Difo got a couple of hits, and everyone contributed but really it was Bryce going 3-4 with a walk and Murphy going 4-5 that did it. When the stars hit like stars that's usually enough.
The Mets are now 11.5 games out. Because I like these things - if the Nats go .500 the rest of the year, they will finish 89-73. The Mets would have to go 52-27 to finish the year to beat that. That's basically having the best July, August, and September in the majors. You see that? I don't see that regardless of what happens tonight.
So that leaves the Braves (9 GB) as the last man standing. They too pretty much have to win the series against the Nats though. After this week there will be only 6 H2H games between the two teams left. If the Braves are too far out the combination of things that have to happen outside of those games just might be too great.
In trade deadline news - the Tigers are ready to be sellers, putting Verlander out there. They'll even eat salary for a big enough return. I'm not saying get Verlander but the Nats might be able to pull off something for say Justin Wilson then. Although he's almost certainly a complimentary piece. Alex Wilson (Very good before this year) would also be an interesting target in the same vein. The Tigers don't really have the ideal player for the Nats in this scenario though - a veteran reliever with a contract they'd eat. They actually don't have any high paid relievers period. Contract wise the best starter piece they have is Anibal Sanchez, but he's been terrible for over a year now. I don't see the point in that. Maybe Alex Avila for back-up? He's not particularly great but he's cheap and better than Lobaton.
On the flipside - the Blue Jays are not ready to sell, or more realistically it makes more sense based on contracts to see what happens early next year. It'll be easier to deal vets like Martin and Tulo with another year of salary gone. Donaldson- teams getting him will lose a year but the value gotten back will probably wash out if he can be healthy and hit. Honestly it's only a Happ deal that'll probably suffer for waiting a year. Short of it - no Osuna for the Nats.
Braves series - then hopefully nothing but more trade talk.
*Don't even try to say 8 hits, 3 walks, 2 homers is good, even in 7 innings. Any one watching that game saw it was a 5 runs in 5 IP affair saved by a lack of timely hitting by the Mets.
The Mets lost Monday's game more than the Nats won it. Although we should all tip the hat to Strasburg for pitching like he did. Honestly though, when it comes down to the Nats bullpen versus anyone else's bullpen the Nats should lose. However, Terry Collins left super effective LOOGY Jerry Blevins (.155 / .211 / .169 vs LHB this year) in to face MAT. Trouble is MAT bats right-handed and Blevins is .343 / .489 / .686 vs RHB this year. Yeah MAT's homer is in there but I hope you can see it was a bad idea. Few pitches later MAT homers, Nats have a cushion that they can blow, which of course they do, without losing the game. Then when a big out is needed Collins goes with Fernando Salas (Curently sporting a 6.31 ERA) instead of Addison Reed (2.59) because Reed is the closer and the Nats win! MVP Terry Collins!
Yesterday the Nats won it. Ross didn't pitch well* but got a lot of luck and his typical 40 runs of support. Yes Difo got a couple of hits, and everyone contributed but really it was Bryce going 3-4 with a walk and Murphy going 4-5 that did it. When the stars hit like stars that's usually enough.
The Mets are now 11.5 games out. Because I like these things - if the Nats go .500 the rest of the year, they will finish 89-73. The Mets would have to go 52-27 to finish the year to beat that. That's basically having the best July, August, and September in the majors. You see that? I don't see that regardless of what happens tonight.
So that leaves the Braves (9 GB) as the last man standing. They too pretty much have to win the series against the Nats though. After this week there will be only 6 H2H games between the two teams left. If the Braves are too far out the combination of things that have to happen outside of those games just might be too great.
In trade deadline news - the Tigers are ready to be sellers, putting Verlander out there. They'll even eat salary for a big enough return. I'm not saying get Verlander but the Nats might be able to pull off something for say Justin Wilson then. Although he's almost certainly a complimentary piece. Alex Wilson (Very good before this year) would also be an interesting target in the same vein. The Tigers don't really have the ideal player for the Nats in this scenario though - a veteran reliever with a contract they'd eat. They actually don't have any high paid relievers period. Contract wise the best starter piece they have is Anibal Sanchez, but he's been terrible for over a year now. I don't see the point in that. Maybe Alex Avila for back-up? He's not particularly great but he's cheap and better than Lobaton.
On the flipside - the Blue Jays are not ready to sell, or more realistically it makes more sense based on contracts to see what happens early next year. It'll be easier to deal vets like Martin and Tulo with another year of salary gone. Donaldson- teams getting him will lose a year but the value gotten back will probably wash out if he can be healthy and hit. Honestly it's only a Happ deal that'll probably suffer for waiting a year. Short of it - no Osuna for the Nats.
Braves series - then hopefully nothing but more trade talk.
*Don't even try to say 8 hits, 3 walks, 2 homers is good, even in 7 innings. Any one watching that game saw it was a 5 runs in 5 IP affair saved by a lack of timely hitting by the Mets.
Monday, July 03, 2017
Can the Nats last?
The Nats are in a better position than every other team not named Houston. They have a sizeable lead (7.5 games as of this morning). They are well over .500 (14 games). They had five players named to the all-star game and it could easily wind up being seven when it's all said and done. Yet things don't feel as good as they should. Why? Well yes, the pen but it's more than just that, isn't it?
Part of that is the fact 1/3rd of the Opening Day lineup is out for the forseeable future. Trea Turner, Jayson Werth, and Adam Eaton are all on the DL and won't be back soon. Werth, the earliest likely return will probably be post-All-Star break. Turner might be back in late August. Eaton is done for the year. We're now down to Stephen Drew, Michael Taylor, and Brian Goodwin, which has worked out just fine but feels like a house of cards. This is especially true with the Nats catcher situation degrading to one of the worst in the big leagues as Wieters has become his worst plausible case (well below average in all aspects) and Lobaton has apparently died. RIP Jose.
Part of the fact is that the Nats can't seem to catch a break with the rotation depth. Gio followed up some luck in the early months with some honest to God good pitching in the last one to keep his stats up and his surprising season going. This should have given the Nats a 4 deep rotation at least. But at the same time the clock might have struck midnight on Roark as he's become incredibly hittable. Maybe Joe Ross is ready to turn the corner. He just delivered his first back to back decent games all season. But if not the Nats find themselves 3 deep in July when being 3 deep in October last year was a problem
Part of the fact is that these things have combined to make the Nats play mediocre baseball for a good couple months now. A hot start got the Nats to 21-9 by May 6th. Since then they've been 27-25. That's two months of 84 win ball. If we look at the past month it gets worse. The Nats were 34-19 on June 2nd. That means they've been under .500 for the past 30 days going 14-15 in that time frame.
This has all been hidden by the fact the NL East is the NL East. From May 6th to Jun 22nd the Mets went 17-26. From May 6th to June 16th the Braves went 18-20. From May 6th to May 27th the Marlins went 5-13 and are on a recent 6-9 stretch. From May 6th to Jun 21st the Phillies went 10-31. The Nats spun their wheels in the mud but the rest of the league slid down the hill. You'll notice thought that for the Mets and Braves the bad stretches don't stretch to today. They've been better recently and that means finally, after 6 weeks of playing .500 type ball and GAINING on the rest of the division, the Nats finally are losing ground.
The Nats are "only" 7.5 up now which is both a big lead for this time of year and their smallest lead since before Memorial Day. If the Braves (currently the 2nd place team) make up two more games it'll be the Nats' smallest lead since all the way back on May 10th. The Nats have lost 5 games in the standings in about a month. At that pace they would get caught in September.
We've said continuously the Nats are a very good to great team but the reality is they haven't played very good baseball for 7 weeks now. If you want to be generous you can blame any number of things. The injuries. The pen and its psychological effects. The schedule, as we talked about a bunch earlier, has been a bear since before Memorial Day. But with 3 games versus the Mets and four versus the Braves starting tonight at home there's no more time for excuses. If the Nats want to keep the rest of the year boring they need to win these series. 2-1 over the Mets, 3-1 over the Braves will likely put the division lead back over 10 games leading into a much more favorable month of games versus some weaker squads with plenty of off days.
The Turner injury alone didn't change my feelings. I still think as these teams are constructed the Nats have it. But I also think we are at a tipping point now where one more injury to the Nats or a big acquisition by the Mets/Braves could change things. A 10+ game lead though, with a light schedule coming up through August 21st, that might be injury/acquisition proof. So do it damn it.
Side Note :
I added active stadiums #21 and #22 to my collection hitting KC and STL this past weekend. I've also seen games at 6 defunct stadiums. Both were actually pretty nice. I'd have to go with KC if forced to choose but it was closer than I thought. STL is definitely a cookie cutter in the model of the new stadium but it's a fine cookie. There isn't anything I can point to that's wrong. It may grow to be a stronger selection if the downtown of STL picks up a bit more. KC is off in the ouskirts in a parking lot with Arrowhead situation, but with the open bowl and the fountains and huge scoreboard it is just more unique. Both could use a bit of work in local food flavor. It would pay big dividends for KC to play up their ribs (Joe's was AWESOME) as much as possible. For STL... I'm not sure how they do this. KC's beer (mostly Boulevard all over but Boulevard is good) is also better than STL but that's to be expected in what is essentially Budweiser stadium.
Oh since you'll ask TOR, LAA, OAK, NYM, ATL, LAD, ARI to go. Mets and Braves... I won't say I can hit "anytime" but I can certainly have these checked off with not too much effort. Other ones are going to take some planning. Defucnt ones are Yankee, Shea, RFK, Tiger, Turner, Metrodome.
Side note of side note :
I added Presidential Library #6 to my collection visiting HST's. Almost half-way there as there are 13 official ones currently. These are not all conveniently located though so it'll take more doing to get this done.
And since you'll ask I've hit FDR, HST, LBJ, GRF, JEC, RWR and yes I do know all their middle names off the top of my head. I visit Presidential Libraries for fun.
Part of that is the fact 1/3rd of the Opening Day lineup is out for the forseeable future. Trea Turner, Jayson Werth, and Adam Eaton are all on the DL and won't be back soon. Werth, the earliest likely return will probably be post-All-Star break. Turner might be back in late August. Eaton is done for the year. We're now down to Stephen Drew, Michael Taylor, and Brian Goodwin, which has worked out just fine but feels like a house of cards. This is especially true with the Nats catcher situation degrading to one of the worst in the big leagues as Wieters has become his worst plausible case (well below average in all aspects) and Lobaton has apparently died. RIP Jose.
Part of the fact is that the Nats can't seem to catch a break with the rotation depth. Gio followed up some luck in the early months with some honest to God good pitching in the last one to keep his stats up and his surprising season going. This should have given the Nats a 4 deep rotation at least. But at the same time the clock might have struck midnight on Roark as he's become incredibly hittable. Maybe Joe Ross is ready to turn the corner. He just delivered his first back to back decent games all season. But if not the Nats find themselves 3 deep in July when being 3 deep in October last year was a problem
Part of the fact is that these things have combined to make the Nats play mediocre baseball for a good couple months now. A hot start got the Nats to 21-9 by May 6th. Since then they've been 27-25. That's two months of 84 win ball. If we look at the past month it gets worse. The Nats were 34-19 on June 2nd. That means they've been under .500 for the past 30 days going 14-15 in that time frame.
This has all been hidden by the fact the NL East is the NL East. From May 6th to Jun 22nd the Mets went 17-26. From May 6th to June 16th the Braves went 18-20. From May 6th to May 27th the Marlins went 5-13 and are on a recent 6-9 stretch. From May 6th to Jun 21st the Phillies went 10-31. The Nats spun their wheels in the mud but the rest of the league slid down the hill. You'll notice thought that for the Mets and Braves the bad stretches don't stretch to today. They've been better recently and that means finally, after 6 weeks of playing .500 type ball and GAINING on the rest of the division, the Nats finally are losing ground.
The Nats are "only" 7.5 up now which is both a big lead for this time of year and their smallest lead since before Memorial Day. If the Braves (currently the 2nd place team) make up two more games it'll be the Nats' smallest lead since all the way back on May 10th. The Nats have lost 5 games in the standings in about a month. At that pace they would get caught in September.
We've said continuously the Nats are a very good to great team but the reality is they haven't played very good baseball for 7 weeks now. If you want to be generous you can blame any number of things. The injuries. The pen and its psychological effects. The schedule, as we talked about a bunch earlier, has been a bear since before Memorial Day. But with 3 games versus the Mets and four versus the Braves starting tonight at home there's no more time for excuses. If the Nats want to keep the rest of the year boring they need to win these series. 2-1 over the Mets, 3-1 over the Braves will likely put the division lead back over 10 games leading into a much more favorable month of games versus some weaker squads with plenty of off days.
The Turner injury alone didn't change my feelings. I still think as these teams are constructed the Nats have it. But I also think we are at a tipping point now where one more injury to the Nats or a big acquisition by the Mets/Braves could change things. A 10+ game lead though, with a light schedule coming up through August 21st, that might be injury/acquisition proof. So do it damn it.
Side Note :
I added active stadiums #21 and #22 to my collection hitting KC and STL this past weekend. I've also seen games at 6 defunct stadiums. Both were actually pretty nice. I'd have to go with KC if forced to choose but it was closer than I thought. STL is definitely a cookie cutter in the model of the new stadium but it's a fine cookie. There isn't anything I can point to that's wrong. It may grow to be a stronger selection if the downtown of STL picks up a bit more. KC is off in the ouskirts in a parking lot with Arrowhead situation, but with the open bowl and the fountains and huge scoreboard it is just more unique. Both could use a bit of work in local food flavor. It would pay big dividends for KC to play up their ribs (Joe's was AWESOME) as much as possible. For STL... I'm not sure how they do this. KC's beer (mostly Boulevard all over but Boulevard is good) is also better than STL but that's to be expected in what is essentially Budweiser stadium.
Oh since you'll ask TOR, LAA, OAK, NYM, ATL, LAD, ARI to go. Mets and Braves... I won't say I can hit "anytime" but I can certainly have these checked off with not too much effort. Other ones are going to take some planning. Defucnt ones are Yankee, Shea, RFK, Tiger, Turner, Metrodome.
Side note of side note :
I added Presidential Library #6 to my collection visiting HST's. Almost half-way there as there are 13 official ones currently. These are not all conveniently located though so it'll take more doing to get this done.
And since you'll ask I've hit FDR, HST, LBJ, GRF, JEC, RWR and yes I do know all their middle names off the top of my head. I visit Presidential Libraries for fun.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)