The Nats almost got derailed in San Diego. They lost the first two, Friday's loss with Doolittle blowing it was particularly agonizing, but they picked it up to win the last two behind Max and Stras. The Nats could afford A split. This was the split. Now they have to keep winning. 4-2 in the last 6 to hit the 10-5 goal.
Again - can't emphasize enough how, if this is going to happen, it's likely to be a long slow slog. After the Mets debacle the Nats were 19-31. Now they are 30-35. That's a great 11-4 run. They were 5.5 behind the Mets, 8.5 behind the Braves, 10 behind the Phillies. That made a good dent, but just a dent. Now they are 2, 6, and 7 games behind respectively.
Think about it. Everyone goes on same pace again. Nats on a 22-8 run. 1.5 ahead of the Mets, 3.5 behind the Braves, 4 behind the Phillies. Not there yet. Again. 33-12. Mets in the rearview. 1.0 game behind the Braves. 1 Behind the Phillies. Still not there. Only need a third of the run then to catch them. Something like 3-1 or 4-2. Let's say 4-1. FIRST PLACE! Now look around. The Nats had to go 37-13 over 50 games. We're on the other side of the All-Star Break. And all they did is catch them. Now it's a two month push to hold onto first. And that's if everything goes perfectly playing as the best team in baseball for two solid months (they are at 2 1/2 weeks right now). Slow it down and you are looking at catching these guys in August. That's after the trade deadline, after the chance to make moves, or perhaps after you yourself have given up. It's unforgiving, but it's what lies in front of the Nats.
Thing is - if this were one team the Nats were chasing, you could feel pretty good but it's three. The Braves in this scenario are going like 28-21, the Phillies 28-23. Again while the Nats go 37-13.
But hey - as of today this is still possible. Hang onto that. Go 4-2 or better. Get to those Philly and Atlanta series and see if you can really say something about the second half of this season (the ATL series will end with game 78)
The games are more fun to watch, but I still don't trust this bullpen. Maybe with Miller returning, if Suero can pitch more like his FIP and less like his ERA, that would give them 4 decent relievers. Still need one more in my opinion, but that's doable. Also, Matt Grace probably needs to be DFA'd.
ReplyDeleteGrace - while serviceably decent last year - seems like the type of reliever that the league has figured out, but he hasn't figured out that the league figured him out...
ReplyDeleteWith a bullpen as bad as ours, and with dumpster signings like Jennings/Guerra/Kontos/Venters/Rodney, why haven't we called up Dakota Bacus? Seems like 35 innings of 1.03 ERA is enough to convince me he deserves a shot? More than Grace does to convince me he doesn't suck, at least.
ReplyDeleteGrace doesn't seem to have a pitch that scares anyone. Somebody needs to show him a new grip or something. Maybe he can call up Pettitte.
ReplyDelete@Ole PBN:
ReplyDeleteAlas, it's the other 553 innings that are holding Bacus back in the minors.
It's not impossible, just highly improbable. I'm still only half paying attention to them. They get back to .500 by the end of June, maybe I'll give them some more of my time.
ReplyDeleteThis season so far has really made me appreciate having a competitive team for so many years, even if we haven't had success in the playoffs. Would I love to win a World Series? Of course. But I think my first goal is to have competitive, enjoyable baseball for as much of the season as possible. I want my team to have a chance for as long as possible, as many seasons as possible. I know the chances are slim right now, but a few weeks ago it was looking like soon there would be essentially no chance. Right now they are playing good baseball and there's a chance of making the playoffs. I can enjoy watching the games. I know sometimes a rebuild is the right move, but I really don't want to go through multiple seasons of watching a team that has no chance.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Josh. I am just happy to be interested in these games again! FG has them at 44% to make the playoffs(and somehow already higher than Phi).
ReplyDeleteIt will probably end in disappointment, but at least they might keep us entertained during the next 2-3 months!
Hard to believe, but 11-7 to get to .500 by the end of this month isn't sounding as goofy as it was a few weeks ago. But it almost certainly means winning series against teams who have been better than them. If they win the home series against the Braves and Phillies, AND get over .500, it's no longer unreasonable to start thinking about the team being worth improving the bullpen.
ReplyDeleteRight now, even with the blowout win last night (and the multiple bullpen collapses it might offset in run differential), they have played like a .500 team with slightly unlucky results overall. If they continue to win the next several series, they would almost have to start to look like a contender. They've won three games against the White Sox who have a better record than them, and even the split with the Padres on the road doesn't seem terrible given they would be about equal. That sweep by the Mets would look like the kick in the ass they needed as a narrative.
Essentially, its a Beat the Freeze race. We are The Freeze. Not necessarily such a bad thing.
ReplyDeleteFirst, in order to get back in the race, the Nats have to continue being the team Rizzo built. For the last 15 games, that's what they've been. Strong offense with a very deep and long line-up. Turner is 100% back. Rendon is as expected or better. Soto is strong. Eaton, Adams and Suzuki are heating up. Dozier is now playing "as per the back of his baseball card". Robles is not rookie-of-the-year, but he carries his weight. Kendrick is killing it. Zimmerman is coming back --- and he is at least a strong bench guy.
Pitchers have stepped up. Strasburg and Max seem to be getting stronger. Corbin has had hiccups, but is good. Sanchez is on a bit of a run. Fedde is better than the guy he replaced.
Bullpen is not fixed but its no longer a train wreck. The new Tanner sets up solidly for Doolittle. Just having that 1-2 gives Davey enough stability that he can almost go with the hot hand from the crew.
Second, Rizzo is not done. And winning from behind is much more satisfying. Hopefully, they will have to work all the way through the summer and peak in October. The odds-makers aren't totally off in their assessment of this team.
It's important to diagnose properly (1) how the Nats have played thus far and (2) how the teams the Nats are chasing have played thus far. This is different from projecting how these teams will perform in the future (which is what the Fangraphs playoff odds are trying to do), but properly diagnosing past performance is part of predicting future performance.
ReplyDeleteI'm focusing on the division (no wild card) and excluding the Mets (because it's one less team to write about and I don't believe they're very good). The Phillies and Braves have the same W-L record 37-29, with run differentials of +19 (Phillies) and +21 (Braves). Based purely on runs scored and runs allowed, both teams have played like 35-31 teams, so their records are both slightly inflated, but not unreasonably so. The Nats have a record of 31-35 and a run differential of +1 - they've played like a .500 team but are a few games under. This analysis suggests the Braves and Phillies are similar and the Nats are slightly worse, with all three teams close to .500 quality.
BaseRuns - which uses play outcomes as inputs, e.g., 1B, HR, etc., rather than runs as inputs - tells quite a different story. Here, the Braves have a +22 BaseRuns differential, which is essentially the same as their actual run differential. But the Phillies and the Nats look very different: the Nats are +19 via BaseRuns, whereas the Phillies are -26. The Phillies' record is 7 games better than their BaseRuns record. That's a huge number, especially this early in the season. By this metric, they've played like a 30-36 team whereas the Nats have played like a 35-31 team.
I think BaseRuns is the closest to the truth about how well the teams have actually played. In my view, the Nats and Braves are simply better than the Phillies. The Nats don't need to play better to catch the Phillies; just playing a larger number of games will result in the Nats' catching them. Without improving the roster, the Phillies will be on a long march to a .500 record, which is what that team is. The Nats and Braves are of similar quality, I think, and for the Nats to catch the Braves, "things evening out over the course of a long season" probably won't be enough. Rather, the team will need to do some combination of the following things: (1) play better than they have been playing (which includes getting better players at the trade deadline); (2) get lucky in one-run games and/or get some of the sequencing luck the Phillies have have had this year; and (3) do especially well in head-to-head matchups with the Braves.
I would suggest playing Suzuki a bit more frequently if he is able. Gomes has been substantially worse this year than expected on offense. I know he’s a better defender than Suzuki, but the offensive gap is too big right now to play Gomes as regular starter IMO.
ReplyDelete@Anon - Good info on BaseRuns. The only issue here is the thought that things will "even out" the Nats have been somewhat unlucky, have weathered serious injuries AND have had a dumpster fire of a bullpen. However, that's no different than flipping a coin 10 times and having it come up heads 10 times. It doesn't mean the next 10 times will be tails. Instead each flip is a 50-50 proposition. So if the Nats are really a 35-31 team, that's an 86 win pace. Given where they're starting (4 games under .500). If you figure they'll need 90 wins to take the division, they'll need to essentially play like a 100 win team. Not impossible if the starting pitching holds up, but the bullpen needs to be better.
ReplyDeleteDo we have enough innings from Tanner Rainey yet to get an idea of whether or not he will hold up? Or Fedde?
ReplyDeleteI think it's a given that the current bullpen can't be expected to be a finished product as currently comprised. While there are examples like the Dodgers using Kershaw, or the Astros using Verlander as high-leverage guys, it would be unthinkable for Rizzo to let things lie, unless Rosenthal c. 2017 is on the Nats' roster, and therein lies the tale. Will Rizzo believe the results, his "eye test", or his scouting report? You don't sink 7m into a guy, sequester him for 30 days among the peons with no discernible improvement, and bring him back into the fire of major league competition without some essential hubris at play. OTOH, yay for his assessment of Rainey as a guy who's worth Roark (assuming we believe Sanchez is the replacement for him).
ReplyDeleteThis was a much more fun blog when you guys wanted to fire Rizzo and trade everyone back in May.
ReplyDeleteAs I said in my last post, baseball is a marathon and Rizzo didn't give up on the season.
I think Rainey and Rosenthal go hand-in-hand, in that they both throw 100mph. Cost is secondary to logic sometimes, as every GM/coach would love to get their hands on a guy who throws really really hard (like Rainey and Rosenthal) in the hopes that THEY can help them discover/regain their form. It's why the Rangers took a flyer on former 1st overall pick Matt Bush--as a pitcher--after he'd been out of baseball for multiple years. Same reason we kept running Henry Rodriguez out there when it was obvious he had no idea where the ball was going. Same reason Daniel Bard kept getting calls long after his struggles began. I don't think it was unreasonable to offer Rosenthal that money (although I'd be curious if he would have settled for $2-4M? What were his other offers?). The mistake was not having him start in Fresno or Harrisburg. Regardless of what level he began 2019, everyone is and should be surprised at how he's struggled.
ReplyDeleteAny chance that Corbin is injured? I expected some regression but not a total collapse.
ReplyDelete