So I've talked about this stretch of baseball for a week now and now we're in it and things are going poorly.
First off the Nats couldn't manage the modest 2-3 goal I set out for them prior to the Yanks and Jays series. They started out right with the split in NY, but Toronto just swept them out. That's a minor problem as 1-4 means they'll have to go 8-2 now to hit the goal of 9-6 or 7-3 to hit the expectation of 8-7. But being a game under where you wanted to be isn't the big issue with this most recent stretch. The upcoming games do favor the Nats right at this moment with those three Orioles games standing out like an potential oasis in the desert. It's never going to go exactly as planned and at times they will underperform and then overperform later.
The big issue is that the last game of the Blue Jays series fed into this odd quasi-doubleheader with the Yankees before going into the O's series. For the next three games you are likely going to see a lot of relief pitchers (finishing out the postponed game), a lot of relief pitchers (in relief of Fedde who may pitch well but won't pitch deep), and a lot of relief pitchers again (in relief of ? who is starting that first Orioles game in place of Strasburg). That's a lot of relief innings so it was paramount for Roark to go deep and save some arms. He did not. He only went 4 and the Nats ended up using 4 other arms yesterday trying to grab that win. Now the Nats are facing a precarious situation where they could really punish the pen if they aren't lucky and careful.
They almost have to choose today. Either go all in and try to win the first game. Use your best relievers in what amounts to a 3 inning game or save your best relievers and try to hang on with your other guys - not throwing more than 2 arms out there if at all possible - and save the better arms for use tonight if needed. Strategy probably dictates the first one. Use Collins, Doolittle, Solis, maybe Miller or another guy. Get the win you know is possible. Don't save anyone for what may be a blowout in either direction tonight. But we'll see. If Suero or Grace starts then the Nats are going in the other direction.
Notes
Bryce is terrible right now. So is Murphy. The best player hitting is MAT. So the line-up is topsy turvy. It's Dave Martinez so I expect him to tinker with it and move MAT up today.
Soto had his first bad series. Just a couple of hits in Toronto, 6 Ks, 0BBs. Did they figure something out? We'll see
I imagine given his performance the other night we'll see Jefry Rodriguez again tomorrow. Baltimore, with it's 2nd worst lineup in the majors, is a nice second line-up to have to face for him.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
33 comments:
After 0-3 in Toronto, I see the Orioles breaking out and scoring some runs this week. Not a lot of faith in our Nats, right now. (sigh)
Maybe in July?
My Nats only come to my town every 6 years and they can’t manage a single win against an inferior team!
@W. Patterson the O's are terrible, anything less than a sweep would be disappointing.
I think Bryce is having vision issues...as in something is wrong with his eyes. Seriously.
@Jimmy - Did you just reverse my reverse jinx? Or something like that?
Harkens to the NFL season where Detroit won only one game - against the Washington, DC football club.
This $400M anticipated contract is looking more bleak with every swing of the bat. Here is another way to slice it: Bryce plays terrible this year and plummets his value, making him more affordable for the Nats to resign him? These rumors of him going to NYY or LAD or CHC are overblown and carry no more validity than him saying he wants to "be a Nat his entire career." So this is interesting. Would you guys pony up $250M to keep him? Knowing what he know about "BRYCE!" and "_bryc...e_", what would be everyone's threshold? Mine would be $250M max. Not a penny more. If you look at it from what Max is getting (~$210M?) and what he's putting up, its not even close. Either Max is worth $400M (which I don't think he is), or Bryce is worth way less. Point is, perhaps a fluke crappy season at the worst (or best) possible time from Bryce makes him more resign-able/affordable to the Nats.
I'm ok with Murphy being bad for the time being. What's not ok is Bryce being absolute puke; making me feel when he gets up to bat with men on and two out the way I used to when MAT got up to bat in the same situation. Not that I don't still feel that way when MAT gets up to bat, mind you.
At this point in the season, Bryce has clearly diminished his value for a long-term contract. But the season is not over. The GMs evaluating Bryce will look at the second half of the season to set their values. And they will factor in Bryce's past performance, and that he is still very young.
And remember, we are not really talking about a $250 - $400 million contract (fortunately $500 million is off the table). We are talking about something like $30 - $35 million per year. But the big negotiating point is going to be the number of years that bind Bryce to the contract before he can opt out (a one-way opt out). Three years, five years, seven years. If Bryce can opt out after 3 years, and he returns to being BRYCE, he'll get a hefty pay raise. So, it's not just about the $$ per year.
Final question: if Bryce's value keeps declining because of poor performance, why would the National necessarily want him? As of today, I don't think he is much of a "draw" for attendance. He's a below average fielder. He is not a clubhouse leader, and I don't think he'll ever be one. I'm all in favor of keeping Bryce, because I've seen BRYCE, who is a draw, and can carry a team. But let's be realistic.
I've also been thinking about Bryce's contract situation. Lots of things can happen between now and the offseason. But I'm wondering what Bryce will fetch on the open market now? If he isn't able to signficantly rebound, should he try for a 1-year pillow contract to establish his BRYCE-ness?
Harper, is Bryce now worth < $300m??
@Froggy: agreed. I've been speculating along those lines for a couple weeks now. BRYCE would never flail at pitches in the dirt, but bryce sure is.
Your big bats need to deliver when the table is set. His 8th inning flyout (tie game, bases loaded, 2 outs) was not a good at bat:
-Called strike on the outside edge, fine.
-Fouled off a pitch that was WAY inside.
-Popped up a pitch that was at eye level. Got a decent swing on it, but it was basically impossible to drive it.
The burden Bryce is carrying right now requires a lot of mental strength to endure. Every failure is magnified 10x for him. If he pulls through and becomes BRYCE again I will have a lot of respect for him. How long does Lasik recovery take an athlete?
Of course the real problem in Sunday's game was not the bats. The Nats were 7-16 with runners in scoring position. If you have 7 hits with RISP, you should win the game.
Murphy hit some balls hard. He might yet come around.
http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/23825904/bryce-harper-playing-way-400-million-contract
Well, so far in 2018 Bryce has had one borderline-monster month and 1-1/2 bad months (technically the "bad" started earlier in April and the "awful" didn't start until the home runs stopped coming, but I'm rounding to convenient calendar months here). There's a lot of baseball left, and it's going to take a long time before Harper plays his way onto the bench. If this keeps up, though, I expect to see more Soto-Taylor-Eaton outfields and days off for Bryce. And if he slumps right to the end of the year, yeah, there's no way we're bringing him back, not with Soto, Robles, and Eaton all with plenty of cheap team control and Taylor still around. Though it would mean that his money (and Murphy's) can go towards a Rendon extension, pitching, and the like. But there's a lot of baseball left to be played before we can do something like write off Bryce Harper.
(That said, there are a lot of scenarios where, even if he does get back to being solidly above-average, where the cold-hearted automatons say "thanks for the memories; here's your qualifying offer" and let him walk. You don't pay a man Mike Trout money to play like Christian Yelich.)
Murphy I worry is too badly hurt to even get back to the point that it's worth giving him a QO. Difo is a first-class utility infielder but he's not a guy you want starting for you all year.
Meanwhile, we're in the Bizarro Universe stretch of games where Michael Taylor's *bat* is demanding to be put into games. Weird.
The weekend was incredibly frustrating, though, as we played just poorly enough to lose in all three games, and managed to score plenty of runs when we couldn't use them but got shut out by Estrada behind Max, so that we couldn't even salvage one out of three. It was an ugly mess, and now we have to deal with the Yankees, plus our SP depth has been maimed.
Reversion to the mean is a powerful force. Paul Goldschmidt was "unable to catch up to hard fastballs" for the first 2 months of the season until, all of a sudden, he became Paul Goldschmidt again. Bryce will come around. His OPS for the rest of the season is going to be between .950 and 1.000 because that's what he is as a hitter.
He sure looks bad now, though.
I do think Bryce will come around. Was just curious if you all thought his recent poor play (added on to his overall career numbers to date) make him more likely to sign at a cheaper rate because team won't throw out an astronomical figure.
I don't know if Bryce is having vision issues, but it would certainly explain a lot. He does wear contacts. Remember Ramos got Lasik during the offseason leading up to his last year in DC and hit much better - as he credited the surgery to his success. https://www.mlb.com/news/wilson-ramos-on-benefits-of-lasik-surgery/c-168407904
Pitching is my biggest worry. Losing Stras hurts and the way Hellickson was playing makes both sting that much more. Tanner is regressing - not to my surprise. My point with Tanner all along was that he is serviceable, healthy, a great guy and will step up for this team when his name is called (bullpen, rotation, long-relief, etc.) But when you're relying on him more than you need to (he's a #4/#5 arm), you get bit.
Maybe there is a problem with his eyesight? (It's got to be something, no?) I recall that he wore glasses for at least one game (or maybe just one at bat) earlier this season.
Here's a question that I would be interested on Harper's take at this point: Do the Nats even want to re-sign Harper at this point and if so, at what price?
Personally, I'd say yes to the former, but I wouldn't give him Stanton money. Perhaps a 1 year deal to regain market value would be best for everyone.
You’re looking at contracts the wrong way at least re comparing to Max. Max was worth 25-30m a year based on his career prior to joining nats and got the appropriate contract. He is wildly overperforming his contract and has been worth (converting the usual 1 WAR=6-7m (according to fangraphs), probably 40-45m a year since we’ve had him (and yes this does in fact mean that mike trout is worth 60m/year on the open market based on his value and his making 30m a year is a crazy surplus deal. Why? Because he never went on open market. But you don’t say “if trout is worth 30m a year Bryce is worth 20 max! See what I mean? If we knew what Max was going to do his first 3-4 years with Nats he would’ve signed a 300 million dollar deal. Comparing Bryce to max doesn’t make sense. If you want a decent comp, somewhere between Jason Heyward’s perceived value when he hit market and ARods when he hit the market at 25 (I choose both because they were same age and Bryce fits snugly between their projected WAR per year).....using that metric I imagine that barring an absolutely HIDEOUS year where he hits .200 with a 100 wRC+, he probably will be worth 275m for 8-10 years. But I could see a scenario for sure where baseball free agency has changed in last few years where GMs simply will not pay anybody for years past age 32, and Bryce has to make peace with a 5-6 year/200m offer.
If you don’t think Bryce Harper is a draw for attendance because he’s hitting .220 at the moment you’re an enormous fool. The guy, who we are all slightly or greatly frustrated with, is on track to hit like 45 homers this year and is arguably the biggest “star” (not best player. Most marketable with cross over brand I mean) in baseball. Respectfully you’ve lost all perspective if you don’t think Nats attendance and Nats revenue from jerseys, etc would diminish with no Bryce. Most people aren’t die hard Nats fans who would jusf as soon watch Soto and Robles as Bryce and go on Nats blogs. Bryce Harper hits a homer or double and the Nats are on sportscenter. He’s a team brand elevation machine. Maybe if he hits .220 for 3 years instead of 70 games that MIGHT change. But um no. Not now.
Correct. Unless there is something going on we don’t know about. It worries me he is swinging through fastballs. That is suspect.
You may have that backward. I actually think if he slumps to the end of the year that might be the most likely scenario of all where we bring him back because Boras and Bryce will think it’s best to take a 1-2 year deal to reestablish him as a superstar, which given the timing of other Nats players re FA, and pitchers getting older like Max and Stras, and the injury risks of Eaton, Robles, and Soto, I would jump at. A guy rolling into FA who hit .200 who a year prior had a shot at a 400m deal does not want that to be the moment his consistency and long term value is appraised.
There’s no GM in baseball, including Mike Rizzo, who would not want to sign Bryce Harper for the right price or years. None. Just last year this was a guy headed for a second MVP before turning 25 before he slipped on a base. He’s leading the league in homers right now. He’s in a bad slump (although with normal BABIP luck earlier in the year this would be a bad slump that takes him down to .250 not .220). He is *probably* the best left handed hitter in baseball when healthy, along with Freddie Freeman IMO. You want him on your team. He’s lifetime .900 OPS hitter (and that 6 year stretch includes 3 years where most people are in college or minors). Let’s not get crazy here. Now. Do you want to sign Bryce to a Stanton contract? Perfectly PERFECTLY sensible to say Hell No on baseball terms. Me? I would not sign him to a deal past age 33 or for more AAV than 30m. And I might be leery of a long term deal that falls short of that. But guys, you really don’t want to be in the following position in 2020:
1. Robles is a great fielder and super fast but not much of a bat, with solid contact skills but basically no real consistent power.
2. Soto is a very good hitter but puts up Rendon numbers, never elite offensive numbers. (Say a guy who hits .275/.350/.480)
3. Eaton is constantly injured.
4. And the Nats don’t have a single player who really scares other pitchers and has 30 HR pop.
5. Bryce Harper has shaken his inconsistency and durability issues, and while still not a great fielder at all, has become a clubhouse leader as he has matured to late 20s—think Ovi—and has just won his 3rd MVP in LA, hitting .320/.450/.600 with 50 bombs.
I do not want to live in that world because we got annoyed that Bryce (1) has had—and played with—what in retrospect we may see as fluke injuries and (2) had a crappy month and a half in his walk year (note: at apex of his “crappiness” sports easily the best offensive value at 125 wRC+ of any player on nats who has played all season and is leading league in homers.)
Does anybody really think that the scenario I just outlined is not a very very real possibility? Let’s wait until the years over before even saying the words “bench” and “Harper” in the same sentence. To even mutter out loud the concept of benching Bryce Harper in favor of Michael A Taylor because Taylor has had a good WEEK is the very definition of crazy lunatic recency bias. This team is going nowhere without a .900+ OPS Harper, so let’s just hope he turns it around. Then at the end of the year will be time to debate his long term worth. I for one don’t have Bryce Harper among the top 6-7 worries about this team:
1. Strasburg might be done for year or close to it, which would mean season sort of over.
2. We may not get back Murphy with power or Zim as a decent contributor.
3. The pen has problems before very back end.
4. I think Martinez might overuse Miller and blow out his arm (he only got hit in Toronto after getting a single day of rest after pitching 2 innings against Yankees, then was pitched two days in a row. No wonder he got shelled).
4. Gio looks very bad recently
5. We have no moderately playable catcher.
6. Okay. NOW we can worry about Harper, Turner, and Rendon not hitting like they should.
@Harper: Re Soto. It’s true it was his least good series....I would say that the 6 K 0BB is very misleading if you watched the games (dunno if you did)....but 3 of his Ks were looking and on balls out of the zone. Some very shoddy umpiring in the Toronto series, especially on the swing back pitch to lefties on inner corner, which literally the umpire simply got wrong like 10 times. And his ABs continue to look pretty good. If I had to pick one pitch that seems like it COULD be a weakness for him, it’s the change up from RHP that often has him out in front swinging over top of. (Of course....a well located change up from RHP on LH hitters is a weakness for everybody).
oh. He just homered into the second deck. Maybe nobody figured anything out....
I take back everything i said about the possibility of Soto not developing into a true power hitter. He just hit a ball that literally sprouted a beak tail and wings and migrated to a new climate.
Guys I think I figured it out.
I go away for a bit and can't watch the games, and they lose 4/5. I come back and they beat the Yanks. I think I'm noticing a pattern here...
When did Harper shave his beard off?
Bryce Harper that is.
Kelvin Herrera is a wonderful add by Rizzo. VERY happy he did it and at the time he did. Not waiting was a very good idea.
@NotBobby
I agree with you on the timing. They're looking more solid for the late innings at least. If they somehow can't right the ship even with the addition, they can at least flip Herrera at the deadline.
Agreed. There is no Nats fan on earth that does not like this trade. I would make two additional observations that will become moot as soon as Harper posts something on the trade tomorrow:
1. I wonder if Kintzler is hurt worse than we know?
2. Note that the Nats are already past the luxury tax threshold so ownership may be more ok than usual to add payroll. Plus now Lerner the Younger is in charge. Maybe he wants to spend what it takes to win a ring for his father?
Obviously it would have been nice to win both games last night, but a split with a team of the Yankees' quality is not a bad outcome. The Blue Jays series was painful, and the Phillies getting back into a tie for second as well--it looks like they're going to be around all year with the quality of their starting pitching.
Getting Herrera is a great add. I wish there was some team control there, but you can't have everything; he's been the 8th-inning guy on a World Series winner as well as a closer; with luck Martinez will deploy him somewhere in the Andrew Miller/Josh Hader role, to pitch against the toughest part of the opposing lineups. This may imply that Kintzler is more hurt than we originally thought, but much like last year this is Rizzo adding a bullpen piece that is straight up better than anything but Doolittle. With luck this means the end of Kelley in the pen.
Now if we can just get Bryce out of his slump, either heal Murphy or replace him, and do something about the rotation depth, things should be just ducky...
@Jimmy - Watched most of the game last night and I gotta say that I was a bit worried. The O's were scoring (off a minor league call-up, granted) but the Nats still had a goose egg. The Nats pulled it out, though, and looked good (except for the double-rundown double-play fiasco that had me cover my head with a pillow!).
We'll see about the next two games.
Post a Comment