Wilson Ramos is a Met and that’s ok. Ramos, to me, is a better catcher than Suzuki or Gomes. The difference in what I project for offense is that great*. This is a smart move by the Mets. But that doesn't mean it's a smart move overall. In fact, I think it would have been a stupid move.
Ramos is a lottery ticket. The Nats don’t need those. They need stability. They need to ensure that an otherwise potential division winner isn’t undermined by a zero at a position like it was to some degree last year. By pulling in two catchers who are likely to be ok, you do that. Would I have preferred one very good catcher? Sure. But what I wouldn't have wanted is one lottery ticket and a Lobaton-esque back-up which is probably what the Nats would have had if they went with Ramos.
The Mets though - they need a couple lottery tickets. They are behind enough in talent they either need to spend out the nose, trade all their prospects or gamble. This is gambling. If Ramos is healthy they have one of the better catcher situations in baseball. (30%? ) If not (70%)then they don't and there's a decent chance in that 70% of either too injured to play or so injured he's not effective.
Just for completeness, since I've been doing this for most signings. This doesn't put the Mets ahead of the Nats.
What to watch for this week : If Keuchel or Kimbrel sign somewhere. These are the most likely targets of Phillies/Braves to get done sooner and where they end up will make a difference in the NL East race one way or another.
*Again I've seen WAY too many "If you look at the last two years Suzuki..." notes. If you look at the last year, it's ok. If you look at the last three years, eh. Picking two years is not stating facts, that's playing with numbers. Suzuki will be average. Which is good for a catcher and good for the Nats! That should be plenty!
No argument here. Even though I think Suzuki is more likely to be an above-average (as in >100 wRC+) hitter this year, he's clearly not on Ramos's level as a hitter, and Ramos is also a superior defender. Whereas Gomes is a better defender than either of them, but a worse hitter, more likely than not to be sub-average (though still average or better for a catcher). Ramos is clearly a better catcher than either of them. But that injury concern is real. The Nats having two genuinely above-average MLB-grade catchers who don't have real health issues is the best insulation against having a sucking chest wound like the Wieters-Lobaton-Kieboom-Severino roundelay of the last two years.
ReplyDeleteReally crazy, Nats lost Bryce and Murphy and only so have signed a man to the max deal who's had one good season but wanna act all superior to teams makin moves
ReplyDelete^^ Although post is difficult to read, its a fair question. Are we better than last year?
ReplyDelete-Catcher: Better
-Infield: Same (Murphy was hurt for most of last year, only played 56 games for us)
-Outfield: Same (a full season of Soto, coupled with an upgrade to Robles from MAT, and we can certainly make Bryce's 1.3 WAR easily disappear).
-Rotation: Same* (but we anticipate getting another starter, so this group could be better than last year's)
-Bullpen: Worse (I like the Rosenthal move, but there are a TON of question marks in that group)
We've been over how we all feel about Bryce, and almost all agree that he isn't worth $350M over 10 years. Murphy was a great hitter but terrible in the field. I wish them well. I'm excited about the moves so far and even more excited for some fresh faces on this team for next year.
As for all the teams "makin moves" - go ahead and make them. I don't think anyone on here is claiming to be superior. The rosters speak for themselves and we'll see when the games are played.
I know that WRC+ is specifically park adjusted, but if you simply look at Suzuki's away splits since he became a Brave and spent half of his games in one of the friendliest hitter parks you'll see league average offense. He is a definite upgrade as the Nats' backup catcher, as compared to what they've had as backups since 2012, but he is not the above average offensive catcher that so many are calling him. The price is still good for what he is, and it creates stability at a position that has been chaotic.
ReplyDeleteI am happy with the Nats catcher situation. I can't remember ever saying that.
I mean, it depends what you mean by "above average offensive catcher." His whole career Suzuki has hit better than the average catcher, but he probably will not hit much better than a 100 wRC+ next year, sure. Still, when the average catcher hits only a little better than Wieters, a decent hitter is a huge offensive advantage.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteI really like that Ramos deal for the Mets. Plawecki is a solid backup, and who knows how long they could stash d'Arnaud on their 60-day DL if they even cared? They really are a sleeping giant given the money they COULD probably spend. This has to be an agent living his dream, spending a lot of club money on guys.
I would imagine even MAT could put up 1.3 WAR if you played him every day. That's not even an average player. But, of course, no one in their right mind would project a lousy 1.3 WAR year out of Harper in 2019.
Just getting a meeting with Kikuchi is a good sign for the Nats, I doubt they'll be his team, but trying at all for posted guys from Japan seems new.
That 1.3 is also a very controversial metric given how much it docks Harper for defense. He had about a 4 WAR season by fangraphs. You won’t often see a difference that big. I’m gonna day a guy who almost a .900 OPS, played whole season, led MLB in walks and hit 35 homers or whatever wasn’t worth 1.3 WAR sorry.
DeleteThe discrepancy also is an indictment of how much we can quantity defense these days.
Deletesirc, I expect Gomes to be the 110 game catcher if the pitchers have any say in it. Now that you can't make mound visits at will, what is Suzuki's advantage over anyone at catcher besides his bat? He's nice to have if Gomes struggles, or the team can't score, but he's got to be the back up going into the year, right?
ReplyDeleteI bet it will be Gomes as primary....but pretty close to even split, which will benefit both catchers. Sort of like the Braves suzuki and flowers arrangement.
DeleteHarper, while Rizzo can still pull a deal out of nowhere for players at any point, doesn't it seem like the Nats are probably going to go cheap on the SP/RP/2B they acquire in the next two months? Dumping Roark as a cost-cutting move would signal they do have a budget in mind, or why quibble over a few million?
ReplyDeleteIf that's so, they also have to consider the raise in salary Rendon will get in a new deal (deferrals still being likely), if they want to field a division winner with those constraints. If they don't sign Rendon this offseason, that number will almost certainly be smaller in arbitration than it would be in an extended deal, but then opens up the need for a 2B or 3B in 2020 even if Kieboom wins a spot. Until they know, wouldn't they have to allow for 5 or 6 million more to Rendon this year Then it makes sense as to why a Miley-type has to come here for half the price of Roark.
If we just end up with Wade Miley as our 4 I'm gonna be pissed. Roark is a far more consistently healthy player who can eat 180 innings. I think they are going all in for Kikuchi at this point, it makes a lot of sense given their lack of moves in the sp market after the Roark trade.
ReplyDeleteI also think Kikuchi is quietly something that might be happening (he’s represented by Boras). PS Mike Fiers seems like a possibility too.
DeleteThey could still get Trevor Cahill, he's probably better than Roark for about the same price but has more risk. Like pretty much every pitcher anyway...
ReplyDeleteIf we're looking at 2B options, why haven't I heard anything on Jose Iglesias?
ReplyDeleteWhy wouldn't Rizzo woo Tulo? Get him for league minimum and he is open to playing 2b and 3b. Tulo can play early in year and maybe less with Kendrick back.
ReplyDeleteIf multiple years then tulo is a tiny bit of Rendon insurance for 3b if he can show health and performance.
I like Harrison. I feel like a hand injury in-season, while a bad break for J-Hay in 2018, can be a real buy low opportunity for the Nats. He checks the boxes that the Nats need checked.
ReplyDeleteAnyone who's played baseball in year after year fashion will tell you what I'm telling you: a hand injury is the most frustrating injury to have during a season. The coaches expect you to play because everything looks right to the onlooker but everything feels wrong to the player.
The hand heals once you stop playing regularly and Wham, back to form.
I like Harrison. They might even be able to get a similar deal to what Kinsler signed. Or He might want a pillow deal on a contender to prove that it was the hand. Also I like watching him play. He'd bring some fun to the summer.
I agree on Harrison. Also, I am really hoping they don't try to go super cheap on SP for the 4 spot. They need more BP help as well. There are rumblings going around saying Machado and Harper won't get nearly much as they were hoping. Would you sign Harper for 10 yrs/$300 at this point? We'll see what the coming weeks show. It should be interesting to see.
ReplyDeleteNo on Harper from a pure baseball perspective. Also do not like Harrison, I think Dozier is the move here for a lottery ticket. We'll see on SP market seems frozen after Lance Lynn's horrific contract.
ReplyDeleteJay - there is a LOT of room between the 300M the Nats offered and the 400M Buster says Harper and Machado won't get. Nats will have to go up from 300 to get Harper back, I'm sure.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDelete"Harper, while Rizzo can still pull a deal out of nowhere for players at any point, doesn't it seem like the Nats are probably going to go cheap on the SP/RP/2B they acquire in the next two months? Dumping Roark as a cost-cutting move would signal they do have a budget in mind, or why quibble over a few million?"
Yes to RP/2B, No to SP (in my estimation). Cheap on 2B is pretty smart (given the glut of perfectly reasonable options). Cheap on RP - well we've seen how that goes. You can luck into an Albers but you get a lot of Janssens as well. If they cheap out on SP (and not talking a trade for a cheap good guy) that'd be a mistake. They need stability in replacing Gio and Roark. Corbin I'd say is a good bet to give them that - but not a lock. They could use a lock. (note : locks are not locks)
They need to sign another SP who perhaps isn’t that awesome but is able to eat innings. Gio and Roark to Corbin and Sanchez...your projected innings soaked up probably decreases by anywhere from 40 to 100. They need to sign somebody else.
DeleteLocks are not locks?? Que?
ReplyDeleteA lock isnt a lock when the arm breaks. He is saying a lock is only a lock until it isnt.
DeleteMatt Harvey just got 11 mill guaranteed from the Angels, with another 3 million in incentives.
ReplyDeleteThe Nats screwed up badly trading Roark as a cash dump unless they trade for an improvement over Roark. 9.8 million for Roark is looking more and more like a good deal.
I think Harper ends up on the Left coast with the Dodgers or his boy Trout and the Halls Look for a contract at 3 years @ $40mm AAV with an option at 2 years .
ReplyDelete*Halos
ReplyDeleteKen Rosenthal is saying that Harper really wants to play for the Dodgers. The Dodgers don't want to go to 10 years so the question is will Harper do less for higher AAV like Froggy has listed above.
ReplyDeleteAlso, am I the only one thinking there is going to be another strike? It seems like the Free Agent market the last two years has been really painfully slow. The players can't be happy.
That amount for Harvey surprised me, it does show that the so-called middle class free agents can get theirs still. There aren't any locks out there - pitchers get hurt or sometimes stink.
ReplyDeleteI don't see a strike as a reasonable option yet. I somewhat buy the argument that teams now have similar valuation systems for players (The Dark Naught deal notwithstanding). Demand still drives the salaries, and the top guys are still getting increases. I don't think it'll be easy for players to make the argument that rebuilding teams have to use their money on free agents, instead of other personnel, debt servicing, player development, etc. That kind of thing went on long before there was free agency. There was an article in the Post just today about Joe Cronin being sold to the Red Sox after playing great shortstop and just a year after being a pennant winning manager for the Senators.
Harvey may have once had cache, but he's certainly not one bit better than Roark and he just got 1.2M more, so how do the Nats figure to get someone who is just average good if they won't pay 10M? Sure starting to look like Rizzo/Lerner misread the pitching market unless they have some plan we don't know about. Sure hope they do have that plan! Kikuchi anyone?
ReplyDeleteI think or at least I hope they figure for more than $10 million they can get a lot better than Roark. For an additional $10 per year they can get any pitcher they want. Though that would mean 4 starters are making $20 million or more per season. That's a lot obviously.
ReplyDeleteSo let's pause and take stock here. When the season ended, the Nats had the following approximate roster:
ReplyDeleteLineup: Kieboom, Zim, Kendrick, Turner, Rendon, Soto, Robles, Eaton
Bench: Severino/Read, Difo, Taylor, Stevenson, Sanchez
SP: Max, Stras, Roark, Ross, Fedde
RP: Doolittle, Glover, Miller, Grace, Suero, Solis, Rodriguez
And from that, the following needs to address:
C
SP3
SP5
RP2
RP(various)
1B/PH
2B/IF
Rizzo added Rosenthal (RP2), Suzuki/Gomes (C and C2), Corbin (SP3), Barraclough (RP depth), and Adams (1B/PH). Meanwhile, he's traded away Rodriguez and Roark, which leaves us at:
Lineup: Gomes/Suzuki, Zim, Kendrick, Turner, Rendon, Soto, Robles, Eaton
Bench: Suzuki/Gomes, Difo, Taylor, Adams, Sanchez
SP: Max, Strasburg, Corbin, Ross, Fedde
RP: Doolittle, Rosenthal, Miller, Barraclough, Glover, Grace, Solis
And the following needs:
SP4
SP5
2B/IF
RP (various)(?)
Thus far, I'd say it's been a pretty successful offseason. The trade of Roark is the only strange part; it's clearly a 100% cost-cutting move as the FO feels they can either get the same performance for much less money, or that they can get better performance out of the SP4 slot and needs the cash to do it. (Personally I'd have preferred they just kept Roark as SP5 and spent money and/or prospects on SP4, but it's not my money.)
Obviously that's ignoring the whole Bryce question, but then again, I don't consider Bryce Harper to be an indispensable player. In a world without budgets, yes, I'd rather have Bryce than Eaton in RF, but we're not living in that world, no matter what Scott Boras thinks.
I terms of Roark out and plans to replace, I won't be surprised if Rizzo warms up his Arizona contacts and makes a deal for Robbie Ray. Ray is projected to earn just $6.1 million in salary arbitration for 2019, according to MLB Trade Rumors,and that's less than Roark, with probably better upside, even though he's sort of an injury-risk because of his 2018. Thoughts?
ReplyDeleteRobbie Ray will cost Kieboom or Garcia plus. He has 2 more years of control at surplus value. It'll be Kluber or Bauer prices for, arguably, lesser value imo.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if the Nats even have the assets to compete with the other shoppers in the pitching trade market.
FYI I'm for making the trade, I'm just feeling down about the Roark trade at the moment. It feels off to me. But in Rizzo we trust, right?
ReplyDeleteI just have this nagging suspicion that the Nats are going to bring Gio back and call it a day.
I was surprised Roark was dealt, but figured at the time of the trade, we'd be bringing in an SP4 to replace him in a matter of hours. Hasn't happened yet. To echo what Jay said, it was apparently a cost-cutting move as Rizzo is possibly thinking he can get way more with $10M off the books (a 10 for 20 swap). Who knows, but SP4 is far and away priority #1 at this point in time. I don't see a trade happening as I don't think we have the prospects (I don't think Rizzo wants to part with Kieboom AND Garcia, just one of them isn't enough to headline a package).
ReplyDeleteSpend the money. Dump crappy contracts/salaries and get a return to replenish the farm. Draft well. Utilize the international pool of talent (hello Soto, Robles, Acuna, Albies, etc.)
@Ole PBN: I agree; I don't think the Nats farm system is deep enough to swing a trade for a higher-end pitcher for SP4 without being willing to eat money (such as Kipnis's contract paired with Kluber or Bauer) in the fashion of the Cano/Diaz trade or the Segura-Santana/Crawford trade, and I'm not sure that Rizzo has the green light from ownership to do that. Without that, I agree, it's not likely that Kieboom OR Garcia as a headliner plus lower-end prospects like Romero or fringe MLB talents like Taylor or Fedde would get it done. Someone else would be able to offer more.
ReplyDeleteApparently (per Jesse Dougherty), the Nats have had ongoing discussions with Anibal Sanchez. I'm of two minds about reports like this. I'm fine with the Nats dipping their toes into the waters of the Miley/Sanchez/Gio (yes, Gio)/Holland tier of starters to fill SP5, because we already know Ross is going to be on an innings limit of c. 110 this season and I have zero confidence in anybody farther down our list of organizational depth starters, including Fedde. Ross's past success and innings limit make him a solid candidate for the SP6 that every team needs sooner or later and Strasburg's history suggests is a definite position of importance for the Nats in particular. But if the plan is to have a Sanchez-tier pitcher at SP4 and Ross+ at SP5 and down, then the organization is in serious trouble. (Plus, it again raises the question of why trade Roark, since it's not likely they can find a better pitcher than Roark for cheaper than the 1/$9.8M he was estimated to get.) SP4 needs to be Keuchel, Kikuchi, or a trade.
(I'm not sure what I think about the idea of getting an upper-tier pitcher for SP4 as Jay and Ole PBN suggest and then going with Ross and Friends for SP5. That would be an improvement on "Roark as SP4" rotation, and with four high-end starters we could afford to massage the fifth slot like we did with Hellickson last year (since before his injury, it's worth noting that Hellickson on the "twice through the order only" strategy was generally really, really good, just for only 18 batters and no more meaning that the 'pen *had* to show up). I mean, heck, the Brewers basically did that with their entire rotation last year and they led the NL in wins, so even with our inferior-to-theirs 'pen we should be able to manage it with one guy. But I'm not sure; as I said, I'm meh on Ross and actively doubtful that anyone after him actually can be counted on for even 5 good innings.)
Why, oh why, do folks keep talking about bringing Gio back? The guy was psycho, something not one looks for in a pitcher.
ReplyDeleteBecause for the last nine years he made 30 starts a year eight of those years (and 27 the one he fell short), and in all but 2018 put up at least 3 fWAR with a sub-4.00 FIP. For a guy who the fanbase looks at and goes "I'm massively anxious about what's going to happen next!?!" with every start--hell, with every pitch--he's been an absurdly consistent performer on a season-to-season aggregate basis.
ReplyDeleteIf you're looking for reasons to NOT sign him, it's that last year was his worst by both advanced statistics and on-field results since 2009. In addition, while his 2017 was very good on the field, it was driven by a very low BABIP against him and very high LOB%, so it's the second straight year of decline by advanced stats. Plus, he's 33 years old, and therefore that decline is actually likely to be decline. Those are reasons for anyone to be wary. But you could do a lot worse for a #5 starter, and unlike, say, Trevor Cahill (who just went to the Angels today), Gio is as likely as anyone to start 30+ games.
Thanks, Dezo. I was responding from emotions and not stats, as you pointed out.
ReplyDeleteAgree on the plus/minus Gio sentiments. A terrible #3, okay #4 (simply cannot start in post-season), and excellent #5. Meanwhile, passable starters are ALL getting 10M and Nats need to move fast before Anibal Sanchez or Wade Miley demands 15M. Unless the Lerners have already closed their pocketbook, then you have the stupidity of three good starters and TWO lottery tickets. Rizzo is pretty good, so maybe he has something in the pipeline, but the options seem to be dwindling.
ReplyDeleteI really don't understand the lack of interest in Tulo. Clearly Rizzo knows something we don't, but the guy is going to come at league minimum and is a veteran presence that may be a little better that the mayonnaise sandwhich that is our elder statesman, Ryan Zimmerman.
ReplyDeleteIt was many mound trips ago, but Gio pitched well with Suzuki.
ReplyDelete"I don't think it'll be easy for players to make the argument that rebuilding teams have to use their money on free agents, instead of other personnel, debt servicing, player development, etc. That kind of thing went on long before there was free agency. "
ReplyDeleteI think a strike will happen if current trends don't reverse themselves. Previously, baseball players were underpaid when they were young and overpaid when they were older. Baseball teams have wised up and reduced the overpaying of older players. Meanwhile, the system is still setup to underpay young players with rookie contracts and arbitration years. A player doesn't reach free agency until his sixth or seventh year. That will have to change.
Hmm... replacing Roark with Sanchez... Hmm...
ReplyDeleteI have to hope that this was the SP5 move...but I know it wasn't...now I think it's clear that Rizzo doesn't run the show when it comes to money. Lerner wanted Tanner gone because he felt it was an overpay, so hamstrung Rizzo gets what he can for only slightly cheaper, but with MORE guaranteed money due to the 2-year contract
ReplyDeleteIt just doesn't make any sense
Well at least they have another 100 mph reliever who can’t find the plate along with their meh starter. Shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic?Gonna need another Hellicksonish guy hiding in AAA.
ReplyDeleteYou were right Harper, this pretty much has to be most of the money left to spend. Some infielder will be left without a path to playing time that’ll sign here maybe. I wonder if another lefty reliever will really be a priority.
Murphy to Colorado as 1B is gonna be Helton prime, right?
So it is Sanchez. Two years, $6M, and $7M, with another $6M deferred, and a $12M option for a third year. The career renaissance seems legit, backed up by actual crunchy-numbers pitching changes, but age and injury lurk. I do think paying Sanchez $9.5M AAV is probably genuinely an improvement on paying Roark $9.8M, not a big one but at least a small step in the right direction. If this is for SP5, with a further move for Keuchel/Kikuchi/trade for SP4, then I'm completely on board with the move. If not, though...
ReplyDeleteI think Murphy is going to rake in Colorado. Though I think it's funny: they signed an ex-Nats shortstop to be their first baseman, and when they finally accepted that it isn't going to work, they signed an ex-Nats second baseman.
Agreed completely. You have to assume Sanchez will fall 50-60 IP short of what Roark would produce for you. Somebody has to soak up those innings. We have something like 18m until we we liuxury cap. I get that we need to leave a tiny bit of room at deadline but why not sign Keuchel and defer the money and create the best rotation in baseball. Get back to winning with dominant pitching. I don’t think a 2B is critical. But going from Gio and Roark to Corbin and Sanchez is VERY dangerous in terms of injury risk an depth.
Delete“Shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic”
ReplyDeleteJesus, is the an Orioles blog? I didn’t know our team sucked so badly with arguably the best rotation in baseball.
Three years of potential control.
ReplyDeleteOne thing to note: it IS true that for 2019, Sanchez instead of Roark saves us money (6m instead of 10m)....if that leads to either the money for a real 5th starter or an upgrade from josh harrison to say jed lowrie...then I can see the sense in it.
ReplyDelete