RIP*, Sweet Prince.
So Rendon is gone and as losing Rendon can go he went to probably the best place he could for the Nats. Out of the NL East, Out of the NL, Not on an AL team that seems to be an immediate playoff threat. Can't ask for more there.
Of course that is an ancillary benefit that tries to cover for the HUGE loss that losing Rendon is. Rendon has been a Top 5ish player in baseball over the past 3 years. There are precious few players that can replace that production. Donaldson and Bryant, two names being bandied about, are All-Star level talents and you'd still not expect them to do it. No, accept facts - the Nats AREN'T going to replace Rendon. They are only going to patch the hole as best they can.
What does that mean? We're not sure yet. Could mean laying out money or making a trade for the guys I just noted to cover 80% of what Rendon can do. Could mean putting that money elsewhere like in the pen. Let's see what the options are today
Sign Donaldson : Donaldson is a nice fielding consistent hitter who had some great years with the Blue Jays a few seasons ago, but seems to have aged out of it. He'll be 34 next year and likely will give you good production for a year or two, after that it becomes dicier. The problem is, as everyone's Rendon back-up plan, he has no incentive to take a deal that's 2 years with options. He is going to get 3 years guaranteed, maybe 4, and he's going to get paid. 3/75? 4/80? We'll see how this shakes out but he is not going to be a cheap fix for anyone and it's tough to see the Nats matching what will likely end up being an overpay by some one.
Sign Todd Frazier - ok fine I'll skip this.
Sign Asdrubal Cabrera - He's fine! He'll get the job done hitting about average fielding about average and letting you worry about spending your money elsewhere, and he'll likely be had with something under 2/10 even in a market that will overheat for thirdbasemen. But he's a big step down. Big. If you make a move like this there better be a corresponding big move somewhere else.
Sign Maikel Franco or Starlin Casto - At 27 someone will take a chance on Franco who put together one half season a few years ago and since then has bounced between average, bad, and good. Not a great fielder he needs to hit to be productive, but he should be cheap. Casto is AsCab but younger and a little less talented. He's giving at 29 what AsCab is giving at 33. The benefit of signing him is he's less likely to feel the ravages of age. The downside is he's more likely to feel the ravages of not being as good. But he's ok in the field so that should stick. When the skills go, they go and no one can say if that's 28, 31, or 34. He'll likely get a better deal than AsCab because of the age so this is more a "let's not worry about this position for a while" move if the Nats make it. Both could end up with surprising performance from a young guy who then could slot in for a few years. But both could also end up with duds.
Trade for Kris Bryant - the word is out that the Cubs (and Red Sox for that matter) are eyeing their next rebuilds. Trying to shed some talent/salary now with guys they don't expect to keep going forward to set up for a quicker return to glory. For the Cubs that means Bryant is on the block. Once thought to be a star in the making (won a deserved MVP in 2016) he's lost a bit at the plate and on the field making him merely very good. He's got two more seasons before free agency and the Cubs see a guy they don't want to spend superstar money to keep around at ages 30-36 or so. The Nats could surely use him but do they have the pieces to get him? Normally you'd say no, but in this day and age Kieboom plus might actually do it.
Trade for Arenado - I mean possible but as of today the Rockies probably want a lot and want a team to take the whole salary so I don't see it happening. Note to Colorado management. If you are going to do something like sign theis Arneado deal it means going all in with money commitments for several years. Not a 2/3rds try for a couple of years. Maybe next time!
Trade for Andujar - depsite spending last year injured the Yankees 3rd baseman is only 25 and looked real good when healthy. But with Urshela deserving a starting gig and DJ LeMahieu (WHO THE NATS SHOULD HAVE SIGNED) being awesome in the field and a .300 hitter at heart there isn't a good place for him right now. But this is a non-starter for the Nats as the Yankees were talking about dealing him for talent NOW. For the Yankees now it's hard to see what that would be other than a big time pitchers (it would likely be a Happ/Andujar package) or a young cheap great reliever (you'd like not to pay everyone in the pen and have someone to turn to in a few years). The Nats aren't in the market to give up that.
What's do I see the Nats doing? I told you a few days ago. I see AsCab being back. Sorry. What's the best move now that Rendon is gone. It's hard to say give Donaldson four years but that fits in with the "now"ness of the Strasburg deal. In terms of pure value it would probably go - trade for Bryant if you can, sign Castro, then Donaldson. But these are all Plan Bs.
Anyway you slice is Rendon is gone and he took a piece of production with him that the Nats aren't getting back.
*Reside In Placentia
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
58 comments:
I think signing one of these plan b options outside of Donaldson is nice. But the key will be Robles making a step forward, trea staying healthy and playing like the guy we have seen in flashes (is he a better hitter with 8 fingers or 10) and kieboom being serviceable and not a liability in the field ( I do think he can hit). We went with pitching over everything lets see how it works out. And hey, WE WON so does it really matter
Seems a lot more options at 2B than 3B. How about Kieboom at 3rd and replace some of TTB's bat at 2nd and 1st?
Ultimately I think Rendon was pissed that they didn't try to re-sign him sooner and the Lerners cheaped out on this one. That contract wasn't huge and losing Rendon basically turns the Nats into a .500ish team, with no good options to begin to replace him. Kieboom might eventually be the answer, but what the Nats need to do is look at replacing Rendon by improving 1B, 2B AND 3B and I just don't see a way to do that, but maybe there's some trade that's available from a team trying to shed payroll that will deal someone good if the Nats take a bad contract for minimal prospects. However, if they're will to do that, why not just sign Rendon to begin with?
Perhaps the best thing the Nats could do is to go in the other direction and sign MadBum or Ryu to be the 5th starter AND improve the bullpen. Trust that MLB will fix the seem issue on the baseballs and try to win all the games 1-0 and 2-1, while adding a bat at the break.
@Treaples69 yeah, it does really matter. Fans were told the team spent two seasons under the cap and let their best young player go. The championship was one of the most improbable in history because they couldn't be bothered to spend money on the bullpen ("starting pitching wins championships" yeah ok but turning them into relievers isn't what means). We were told this was all so they could reset and have the money to sign key players. Having Stras back is great but it's hard to square losing a top-5 hitter to the same deal they'd just handed out two days before (minus deferrals, of course).
@Harper Love the Dickens reference.
Sad to see Rendon go. Very sad. He is a class act.
There's a lot more than fans see in these decisions. And I agree. Out of the division, out west in the American League. Hope he enjoys Orange County. Go well dude. Protect Mike Trout in that order!
@Harper, thanks for putting our perceived meager options out there. They don't look too good. I'm guessing that Rizzo has a few more ideas and hoping that he pulls something out of his hat.
Perhaps Rizzo had more hope in the minors than we do? Garcia?
International signings? A Soto-type rabbit pulled out of a hat?
Or, as others have said, focus on 1B and 2B. Get the production from those positions.
If there is any silver lining in this, its that the Nats must start the rebuild. Time to invest in youth.
@JWLumley, it’s from Hamlet, not Dickens. (If you’re talking about “Good night Sweet Prince.” Maybe you’re referring to something else.)
I'll bet that Rendon doesn't set up housekeeping in Placentia. It's close, but as we'd say growing up, "who'd want to live in a place associated with afterbirth." (Sorry Placentians, we didn't name your town - and I KNOW there's an "i" in there.)
I wish him the best and it'll be interesting to see what happens here. Rizzo didn't call me about it so all I can do is watch.
I don’t think Rendon was mad about something. I think he didn’t want to be underpaid. The 210 mil contract supposedly had a real value of like 170. You’re just not going to sign a guy for 75 mil under value. Sorry. The issue with the Lerners remains the same issue. Their refusal to pay money sooner rather than later. That applies to both the deferrals obsession, but in my mind, the bigger problem is the inability to extend ANYBODY when they’re young players. The Astros extended Bregman. The Braves extended Acuna and Albies. The Mets extend DeGrom. The Phillies extend Nola. The Nats should currently be trying to extend Robles and Soto, they should be trying to (or already) extended Turner, and they should have been trying to extend Rendon like 5 years ago. They just don’t do it. And it ends up making them having to either overpay in free agency or let their home grown stars go.
Obviously this is sad, and not just because Rendon is a great player whose production will be impossible to replace. He was also a unique personality on the field, and a really fun person to spend time with and root for. (I will of course keep rooting for him -- thank god he didn't sign in the division -- but just as obviously I'll see him play a lot less often.)
But I also think people are going way too far with the wailing and the rending of garments. .500? By Fangraphs depth charts, the team already projects to 84-85 wins, and right now that's 3rd in the NL and 2nd in our division (1.5 games behind the Mets!? and about 1 game ahead of the Braves.).
And here's the thing -- the team isn't done spending money. They may get Donaldson or trade for one of the big contract insta-fixes to replace 75%+ of what we lose (Bryant, Arenado, Betts, etc). But they also might build out a bullpen that's actually a team strength instead of huge weakness. Or something else I haven't even considered.
Based on this team's history, I think we all have a pretty good idea of what we're likely to see on April 1st. A projection in the 88-90 win range (which, I admit, is lower than we've had some years, but is a far cry from .500 and we need to be realistic about a relatively bare free agent market at this point), a payroll up near but comfortably under the cap, and a 50%+ likelihood of making the playoffs.
The 2020 Nats won't be strongest team we've had, but they won't be bad or even middling. We have the best rotation in baseball. We have a number of pretty good hitters and at least one great one. Plenty to enjoy next year, even in our sadness about losing one of the best things about our team.
@BxJaycobb, it's in David Copperfield, but perhaps it's just Dickens quoting Hamlet. Wasn't much of a Hamlet fan, but thanks
@Anon - Fangraphs aging curves aren't always the best. As much as I hate it, Max is getting older. Strasburg is getting older. As I said, losing Rendon puts them at .500ish, like 82-83 wins. The Nats have alway built teams that project to win 91-92 games and hoped for some luck and midseason acquisitions to put them over the top. The NL East has gotten a lot better, so rolling out an 87-89 win projection team will likely mean 3rd or 4th place because the schedule is going to be very unbalanced.
@JW
Current payroll numbers by roster resource (these are cash not cap payrolls, but the story is similar):
WSH: 163M
ATL: 142M
PHI: 184M
NYM: 200M
I suppose Atlanta has room to put some separation between us if they choose to use it, but I don't know why you think the Phillies will be able to improve their team more with 20M than we can with 40M? And it's reasonably likely that the Mets are done.
I think you're being unrealistically pessimistic by comparing the Nats as currently constructed to high-side estimates of what you think the other division teams will do but I suppose we'll see what happens over the next few months.
@ Lumley -- I know it's frustrating to lose Rendon. I also really enjoyed watching him play. But I have to agree with Anon that losing Rendon alone doesn't drop the Nats to a .500 team. Nats went 93-69 last year? Take out Rendon's what 7 (?) WAR and that drops you to 86. And that assumes that they don't make any additional improvement, which Anon highlights is unlikely given the payroll space. Now injuries could certainly do it, but I think expecting an additional 4 WAR drop from the current roster through aging or performance issues and no additions that would add any WAR would be unlikely. I think they'll probably land somewhere around 90-91 wins. Whether the end result is enough to get into the postseason...that's another question entirely.
@Bx -- I am with you very much on the frustration at not extending young players. They should have extended Soto LAST offseason. Soto, Robles, Turner; the Nats should be really looking to see if they can extend them. It drives me nuts that they aren't. I'd 100% be looking to do a 8-10 year deal with Soto if I could. I really don't like the Braves, but I do very much appreciate the approach they have taken with guys like Freeman, Acuna, and Albies.
@JW you're not accounting for luck and the aging curve, but assuming that 93 wins is the true measure of the team. Also, WAR isn't so simple. You lose 7 WAR from Rendon and replace him with AsCab, that could actually be an 8 win swing because there's a non zero possibility that AsCab is below replacement level. Also, the Nats were relatively healthy last year and this makes their lineup very thin. If Soto or Turner goes down, this could be a team that really struggles to score runs.
Also, you're assuming that there is some asset out there for the Nats to spend $40M on that will make them appreciably better. Sure, Donaldson might do the trick in 2020, but then the Nats may have a $25M anchor around their neck in '22 and '23. Other than that, there's no one out there and the Nats don't have the prospects to pull off any kind of deal. Still, my comment was about where they stand right now, not where they'll stand after some moves.
Finally, I don't believe that Sabermetrics has ever been able to account for lineup protection. I know that there's been some research that suggests it doesn't exist, however, there are far too many anecdotes of guys like Rich Aurilia hitting in front of Bonds that lead me to believe that it's just something we haven't quantified yet. Even still, I have to believe that taking Rendon out of the lineup hurts Soto to some degree.
Rendon got the same amount as Strasburg, without deferrals.
Here is my completely uneducated guess: Nats offered the same contract to both. Strasburg said yes, Rendon said no deferrals. Nats would have to either take away deferrals or increase the money to get him. They refused, either because they were too cheap, or because they made certain representations and took certain positions during the negotiation with both players, and now do not want to go back on those positions for only one player, especially when the other player already agreed to them. Rendon expressed to other teams that this is the deal he would sign, without deferrals, if someone would offer it (perhaps with the plan to sign the Nats' deal if no one would offer). The Dodgers and Rangers said no. The Angels said yes. Maybe the Nats had one more chance to be less cheap/change their position. They didn't. Rendon signs with the Angels.
Here is my problem with not resigning Rendon, whether my above hypothesis is true or not: why not just go above the &*(*&%^ luxury tax threshold??? They'll be above it for two years, tops. Everything is reset so the penalties won't be bad. They've gone above it before. They just got a ton of $$ with MASN and a world series run. They've gone above it *without* these things! They've promised to the fans that spending less money last year meant resetting the tax penalty so they can spend money this/next year(s). And now they don't! I don't want to be one of those "sign everyone or I hate you" type of fans, especially after they just resigned Strasburg, but everyone knows the Nats/Lerners could've afforded this contract and they aren't going to get comparable value spending the $$ elsewhere (and I think the Nats know this, so you have to assume their plan after not giving the money to Rendon is to not spend it all).
You don't replace him. Donaldson's contract will be cheaper, but worse. The Nats don't have the trade pieces to get Bryant or someone similar, and even if they do, they are gone after two years and appear very unlikely to be resigned. Maybe the Nats luck out and Kieboom and Garcia both work and Turner resigns for cheap (note there is no way the Nats keep both Kieboom and Garcia if they trade for a starting third baseman), but this is a lot of unknowns you're relying on working out. Rendon is a special type of player who is consistently top 10 (making him top 5 overall) who plays a position where it's near impossible to find that value. You don't try to "replace" him because he's not replaceable. You just try and win without him.
Also as others have touched on, with the Nats' lineup in particular, this will be a big hit.
Why isn't JD Martinez discussed as an option. He has a less stupid face and persona than Donaldson he's cheaper, he has opt outs, he's younger, Hits for better average, Boston's desperate to shed payroll, has glorious opt outs he could use bailing you out at any time. Use the rest of the money on Cabrera and the cheaper of Genett/Shaw with Kieboom waiting in the wings. thank Zim for the memories and lets do this.
@mike k - I think you're spot on. You're not replacing Rendon and the issue here is that the message to fans has been 'We're getting below the luxury tax threshold so we can spend'. Now, you can't spend. There's no one left to spend that money on who could really help. The only possibility I can see is that they think Kieboom AND Garcia are both ready and there's a player they can sign and/or trade for to put at 1B. Then spend the rest of the money on the bullpen. I mean, Rizzo has worked out some absolute heists in the past on trades, like the deal for Turner and Ross, but I just don't see who might be out there that would help fill the void.
@mike k, "why not just go above the threshold"--because they want to pretend that the tax is really onerous, and not a de facto salary cap they instituted without the players' agreement. It's collusion, although obviously less blatant than what the owners tried in the '70s because the players are still getting paid. They've also been careful to be seen bidding up the price on the big name free agents this offseason, which they'll point to in the upcoming negotiations as evidence that there's nothing nefarious going on.
I think you're right that they gave the same offer to both players, Stras took it and Rendon said no.
Excellent analysis as always, Harper. But you did miss an opportunity at the beginning to use,
"Good night, sweet prince,
And flights of Angels sing thee to thy rest!"
:P
Also take Andujar and shove it. Nobody wants your teams trash Harper. No we won't trade Robles for Happ either. lol
Here's my best guess. Stras wanted to come back. Rendon... not so much. I think Stras would have stayed for less, but probably the bidding war with other teams drove that price up and Boras got in his ear. Rendon honestly didn't show a whole lot of enthusiasm about returning.
All things considered, this stings less that Bryce leaving because: 1) we won the World Series, 2) Bryce went to Philly and Rendon went to a non-contender in a different league, and 3) Bryce left first.
Before Bryce left, we actually believed that we stood a chance at keeping him. It stung that he was the first homegrown player to possibly leave, and by the time he took Philly's offer, we were pissed and felt yanked around by his "I love it here" comments over the years. Rendon said the same stuff, but I doubt he'll get booed because he's more likable. If I learned anything in 2019, its that I sure put up with a lot being a fan of Bryce Harper. I never thought Rendon would come back to DC, I was a fool to think that Bryce would. It's different.
Bottom line, if we didn't win, the outrage would be tremendous. Similary to when the Caps lost in the first round last season (again), but because they won the cup the year before, the general sentiment was "meh, fun season tho!" Hilarious.
Brock Holt?
It is worth asking how much of the failure to extend the Nationals' young stars (starting with Harper and Rendon, and hopefully not extending to Soto/Turner/Robles) is the result of a faulty management philosophy versus the fact that the Lerners have let the franchise become (arguably) overdependent on Scott Boras, whom we KNOW definitely has a philosophy against having his clients sign extensions.
Probably a mixture of both, I presume, but the second factor shouldn't be overlooked as fans aim all their vitriol at ownership. (And for what its worth, yes, it would have been better to have signed Rendon for that amount and try to make up for Strasburgs' departure with some combination of Ross/Fedde/Voth than the hole we now find ourselves in).
Maybe their valuation of Rendon is based on something we don't know. They dropped out of the Rendon bidding very early as far as reporting goes and they never revisited it. It's easy to assume that Strasburg is something that's easily replaced in theory, but at least you can find position players that will incrementally make up for Rendon's loss. If the Nats believe that Strasburg is now an "Ace", all bets are off.
I think this is going to be a fun offseason for Rizzo. He doesn't have much to trade with, he has some money that he doesn't have to spend, he's got a title in hand.
I really hate the other 3B options so I do think AsCab makes the most sense and then find a way to spend on the other side of the infield. I kinda like the JD Martinez idea if it doesn't require Kieboom/Garcia. Do Rutledge/Denaburg or something. Nats don't know how to develop pitchers, anyway, so ship them off like we did with Giolito
CP, I agree, that is the fallback. I think the trade route is how Rizzo will go.
But I will say, Voth might have figured something out that gets him the 2mph more velocity, and he's still a Nat. A coach may have helped.
No trading Voth. Like him the best of the Ross/Voth options. Fedde can just go.
Where exactly are we playing JD Martinez, a guy who's never played an inning of MLB infield in his life? And rates poorly on defense as an OF?
@ Anon 11:16 - Perhaps but you're only considering the guys who have/we assume will play well and not the ones that didn't work out. It could also be an ownership (or a GM) philosophy not to give extensions to players with so little MLB time, and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with that. Strasburg/Rendon/Harper probably wouldn't have signed early extensions because then why would they have hired Boras. How about the others - would the Nats have been better off if they gave an early extension to Desmond after his .300 seasons? Espinosa? Zimmermann? Ramos pre injuries? Storen? Clippard? Roark? (maybe Roark but that means no Sanchez). The only "sure things" were probably the aforementioned three Boras clients, who weren't going to sign those extensions.
@ blovy8 11:17 - I've considered that but I find it to be highly unlikely. I admit I really wanted the Nats to resign Zimmermann, was not happy that they did not, and now it's clear that the Nats made the right (non) move. But with him there was the prior Tommy John, so there was a rational explanation why the Nats might think he would decline in the future. I just don't see how someone who was a highly touted prospect, who "fell" to #6 in the draft because of ankle injuries that never came back, who has consistently played great, who has consistently improved every year, and who does not depend on any one particular tool that declines due to age, has some reason why he's not going to perform really really well over the next several years. We'll see.
Tell'm Wash.
Billy Beane: We want you at first base
Billy Beane: We want you at first base.
Scott Hatteberg: But, I've always played catcher
Scott Hatteberg: But, I've always played catcher.
Billy Beane: It's not that hard, Scott. Tell him, Wash
Billy Beane: It's not that hard, Scott. tell him, Wash.
Ron Washington: It's Incredibly Hard
Ron Washington: It's Incredibly hard.
A trade for Bryant would be my preference, if doable. He's the only replacement with a potential ceiling like Rendon's. Donaldson strikes me as a clubhouse chemistry risk who could soon fall off a cliff due to age. Arenado could be decent even though a Colorado to anywhere else move for hitters should be cause for skepticism, but if the Lerners wouldn't pay Rendon why would they pay Arenado almost the same (and presumably he commands more of a return in a trade than Bryant due to recent performance).
Then sign Castellanos or Ozuna to play 1B?
I don't want to spin losing Rendon into a good outcome, but perhaps the money wasn't there to sign both precisely because the Nats are thinking about locking up Turner, Soto, and maybe Robles into extensions a la Acuna/Albies.
Absolutely no indication they are doing that now. But until the postseason has concluded, it's hard to say they aren't spending money. The tried on Rendon. The did spend on Stras. One year after they tried on Bryce and did spend on Corbin. How many other teams out there tried on all 4?
At least Castellanos has played on dirt at some point in his career...
I think Rendon went to the highest bidder. I don't think he was angry at all. Have you looked at the Angels roster? Other than Mike Trout, they are pretty bad. They were 72-90 last year. They were -99 run differential. Their pitching is just awful - at all 5 spots imo. Maddon and Rendon aren't going to make up finishing 35 games behind the Astros and 24 games out of the wild card. This looks an awful lot like Albert Pujols for them. In a few years, Rendon may even end up at first. I love Rendon, but it is pretty obvious he wasn't giving a hometown discount or have any overriding desire to return to DC. That is his call. I don't understand why players don't factor in happiness into their decision. Of course, Rendon always said baseball didn't define him, so going for the most money makes sense. Last year he made a point of saying Boras works for him - thus this was Rendon's call.
Rizzo will figure something out. He always has. The Nats finished with 93 wins but had that awful start. If they can make a couple of moves they'll be in it.
@Harper. I’ve spent the day parsing the WP beat folks and MLB Network and Twitter voices like Ken Rosenthal and Heyman etc. and what I’ve gathered is this. The Nats are going to sign Donaldson. It almost seems like they knew they were going to do it the second they chose Stras over Rendon. And they’ll overpay if they have to. My guess is 4/105, with a tiny bit deferred. I think the Lerners like the schedule of contracts coming off the books as well (first Max, then Donaldson, then Corbin, then Stras).....and I think they realize that they’ll have only a couple years of Stras on books by time they have to pay Soto. So that’s my prediction. I think enter the holidays with Donaldson on a disturbingly long deal that is, nevertheless, strictly necessary.
I'd be ok with that. Donaldson had a better DRS at third than Rendon last year. Also, I saw something online that the Nats were talking Kieboom and Joe Ross for Kris Bryant - I'd do that deal any day. I also saw the Cubs wanted Robles - I wouldn't do that deal. You could consider Eaton, Kieboom, and Ross for Heyward and Bryant. The Nats eat Heyward's contract to get Bryant. I really like Eaton, so I'd be hesitant to do that. Finally, there have been a couple of things about the Nats getting Matt Chapman from Oakland. I don't buy that one.
They won't do anything worth a crap because the cheap, greedy owner is a POS. They lucked into a championship. I enjoyed it, but that will never happen again The league is just a waste of time.
@Jay. I also don’t buy Matt Chapman from Oakland. He’s too cost effective and good. He would literally cost like Soto or something. Re Bryant trade....Ross+Kieboom seems a LITTLE light to me on the Nats side. I totally believe the Cubs would ask for Robles, Kieboom, Ross, and also believe the Nats would rightfully say no. The question is is there something between those two that works? Perhaps Kieboom+Ross+Denaburg. The Heyward trade is no good for Nats. I think the Cubs can get one or the other:prospects for Bryant or somebody taking Heyward’s bad contract....they can’t have both. Or perhaps something like Heyward+Bryant for Ross+Eaton. But the Nats would never both take on a contract like that AND give up their best prospects I DONT THINK.
My preference is Donaldson and keep Kieboom because frankly we need more than one infielder. I was thinking about it—-the 3-4 year length of a Donaldson deal and his age don’t actually bother me that much because defensively he’s (as you said) surprisingly agile at 34 and also if the Nats need to move him to 1B for second half of the deal, that’s fine. The question I think is whether you believe in his health.
Having lived through the aging that occurs from 34 to 38, I really hope the Nats don't sign Donaldson to a 4 year deal. It's even worse when you consider Donaldson's injury history. Great, he had one healthy season, but he had a couple of very unhealthy seasons before that.
I think the Nats' failure to extend homegrown players before free agency stems from two things: (1) several of the guys they would have wanted to extend early are Boras guys, who typically do not take discounts in exchange for long-term financial security. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that many of these guys were first round picks that earned big signing bonuses, so their motivation to "make sure they get paid" by signing an extension is lessened because, to some extent, they've already gotten paid; (2) the experience with Ryan Zimmerman. They re-signed Zim in 2012, two years before he would have been a free agent. In those two years, it became quite clear he could no longer play 3B. And yet, his extension paid him as though he was 3B-capable and not 1B-only. A 1B-only Zim gets a much smaller deal in 2014 than the the deal 2012-3B-capable Zim signed. I think the Lerners were convinced to pony up for Zim two years before free agency because they were told "this is how it's done in baseball. If you don't sign your homegrown players before they get to their walk year, then you'll have to win a bidding war in free agency to retain them. therefore you must sign them two years ahead of time or you will lose them." This similar logic led the Phillies to sign Ryan Howard to that terrible contract, which didn't even kick in until he was already cooked (note: this was a bad contract even apart from the timing issue, but the timing made it much worse). So, I think the Lerners have convinced themselves (rightly or wrongly) that the conventional baseball wisdom is wrong or incomplete. In their view, if they are going to sign a player years before he can become a free agent, they need to be compensated for the risk the player gets hurt/worse during the intervening years, and therefore require a discount to do so. When players refuse to take a discount (or the discount they're willing to take isn't large enough), the Lerners have reacted by winning and losing some free agent bidding wars with their homegrown guys.
Fair to criticize the Lerners, of course, but I think that's their logic.
Donaldson's games played since 2013: 2013 - 158; 2014 - 158; 2015 - 158; 2016 - 155; 2017 - 113; 2018 - 52; 2019 - 155.
This is a very durable player who was hurt over the course of a two-season stretch in 2017-18. He was precisely as durable in 2019 as he was prior to his injury years in 17-18. Does this mean that he's going to be as durable going forward? Of course not, but I think it's reasonably strong evidence that he's past whatever injuries caused him to miss time in 17-18.
The other thing to note about him is how consistently good a hitter he's been, even when injured. Of the seven seasons since 2013, he's run a WRC+ above 130 six times, with three of those being above 150, and another being 147. During 17-18, the two years he was injured, his WRC+ was 151 and 117 respectively. His WRC+ during his very worst recent year when he was hurt and limited to 52 games (2018) was the same as Trea Turner's last year. Donaldson is an excellent hitter, period.
The monster of 2015-17 is probably not coming back. His hitting and fielding numbers have declined since then, but both are still excellent, and the decline has been very slight. I don't want to pay a 38 year old 3B $25M in 2023, but if that's what it takes, so be it. I think it's very possible Donaldson is Rendon's equivalent or better over the next two seasons, even though I wouldn't bet on it.
I thought it was a Lebowski reference.
If we miss out on Bryant and Donaldson, Seattle is probably willing to trade Kyle Seager. He's only had one bad year and will cost a bit because of the awful contract the Mariners gave him but apart from last year has been pretty durable and shown signs he can perform up to all-star level albeit not nearly as consistently as Rendon
Anon 9:21:
Rendon tied the locker room together.
Another thing re: Donaldson, the DH might be in play in a few seasons. Might make that third and fourth year sting less. I say do it. Win now with this group and then rebuild in a few years around the OF and Turner.
The miss on Rendon stings, I'm really just bummed we couldn't get Didi as a follow on here and move Keiboom to 3B (or Didi). There are some very strong options coming to market in a year or two, would hate to get hamstrung in a long term contract.
I agree. Sign Donaldson. This team is built to win now and every year that goes by Max Stras Corbin will age out of their prime not to mention players like Soto and Robles will begin to cost money. The payroll schedule is lined up perfectly fine to pay an offensive player 25 AAV for four years. He would come off the books before Soto hits FA and would be on the books with a Turner extension only after Max comes off. He’s a player you can move to 1B or DH for second half of his contract and he’s a player who seems more agile than usual for a 35 year old (better DRS than Rendon in his age 29 season). Do it. The Nats can’t make the playoffs without another middle order bat.
I have to agree with BxJaycobb and 8:14 Anon. Just give Donaldson his damn four years for $100-105M. He's no more injury-prone then Rendon is (his 2018 injury time was directly related to his 2017 injury), and he's a roughly five-win player right now and that's probably as good as we're going to get--neither Bregman nor Chapman is coming to Washington. Yes, age will take a bite out of that over the future years, so that by Year 4 we're probably looking at an overpaid two-win first baseman. But hey, we just lived the Ryan Zimmerman Experience for the past four years, so it's not like the Nats don't know what to do with a former superstar 3B turned 1B who's getting paid too much. (And heck, since health has never been Donaldson's problem, maybe Year 4 Donaldson will end up being 2017 Zim.) As Max B. points out, the DH might also be in play by the end of the contract. And right now Donaldson is still actually a good defender, even if he's not what he was when young, so he might even still be on 3B at the end of the contract.
Plan B needs to be "trade for Bryant." He's slightly better than Donaldson, younger (so less likely to have a drop-off of any kind), and would be cheaper. But he's also only going to be around for two years, and he'll cost prospects.
Plan C could be "trade for Arenado," but he's going to be stupidly expensive in both what it takes to get him and having to pay him. On the other hand, we were going to pay Rendon that for the same age range and pretty much everyone was saying the two of them were basically interchangeable until this year when Rendon elevated his game (and we appreciate it, Tony!).
Plan D...I don't know if there is a Plan D. Sign Cabrera for 2B and play Kieboom at 3B, maybe. Cabrera's above average, and he'll come cheap, and maybe we can get Castellanos for 1B or something with the money we save. But Plan D is the failure zone. I mean, you can't *replace* Rendon outright unless Rizzo gets hold of the video evidence that the Astros were doing a lot worse than sign-stealing and gets Bregman as the price of covering up, but plugging a two-win guy in his place is going to hurt a lot.
Outside-the-box idea: Kindly take David Price's contract--all of it--off the Red Sox's hands for the low, low price of Rafael Devers in exchange for, say, Kieboom and Ross, and sign Cabrera to play 2B.
@Dezo. I agree with all of this. I actually think the Castellanos at 1B+ Cabrera at 3B idea isn’t bad at all....it sort of compensates for the lost bat at 3B. I would personally prefer a platoon at 1B of Zim and Thames. I think that one of the needlessly lost value of the Nats last few years is not understanding how crazy a split Ryan Zimmerman has had in his last few years.....he simply cannot hit RHP and should never play against them again, but actually still hits LHP well. If you can *truly* platoon him with a competent LH at 1B like Thames you could pick up some real value/production.
I don’t believe that Lindor or Bryant or Arenado are realistic possibilities for the Nats....have looked into this a bit....the Cubs and Indians are going to be looking to raid a top 1/3 farm system for multiple blue chippers. We don’t have that, and if we did, I don’t know if it would get us anywhere to deal Kieboom (opening up a hole to fill another). If a deal gets done, I think the obvious matches are:
For Lindor, the Dodgers, who apparently have been talking to the Indians, and can deal Lux+Verdugo or Lux+Dustin May for example. For Bryant, the obvious match is the Braves. Actually, it’s so obvious that I feel decently confident that that deal will happen. The Braves can give up Austin Riley (to play 3B/OF) and say, Max Fried (or another of their arms like Bryce Wilson) to Cubs......I think this will happen.
Then arenado I think won’t happen due to money mostly. Also I worry about how much arenado declines due to not being at coors (check out his road splits).
Re TSTUTUGO. By the way, something I’ve often wondered about. Are the Nats just like....not even scouting players in Japan, Korea, and Cuba? I’m not complaining, because it’s kind of rare to have impact players from some of these places, but you see for example the Rays, who have no resources and they’re able to go out and get the best Japanese bat available this year, who may well have been a very capable platoon 1B LHB for the Nats....and it feels like the Nats simply don’t even LOOK at Asian players. Know what I mean? I’ve never heard them even connected to even looking at somebody one of these non Dominican foreign countries. Maybe this is a remnant still of the smiley gonzalez stuff.
@Harper. Do you agree that if the Nats sign Donaldson, as seems to be the case, that they’ve been given permission to go past the first lux tax. It would seem very challenging to stay under if you add 25 AAV and then still have to get I imagine a 1B and bullpen pieces all for like 10 mil or so.
In hindsight the Moustakas deal looks excellent. Now I find myself wishing the Nats had gone after him early. Give him like 70 mil over 4. Moustakas, Didi, and Thames and the Nats would’ve been pretty much all set for infield. All that would’ve cost just a little more than Rendon’s avg each year and would’ve been 2 year and 4 year deals. Done and done. But now, we get to overpay Donaldson.
Is it weird that we haven’t heard any rumblings about 1st base? Or are they waiting to figure everything else out then go back to Zimm and say, “okay we’ve got 3.75 M left. Here you go.” But what’s the other side of the platoon? I thought Thames was so obvious an answer I kinda expected it to happen pretty much right away.
As far as the rest of the lineup, I’m not concerned. Soto is Soto, we know what Eaton is, and Turner. I think Robles takes a big step forward next year. He’s a wild card next year. And there’s a non zero chance that Kieboom is pretty good. If he played in the majors the same way he hit in the minors you have a high-average, line drive hitter with plus defense. You know who hit like that? The guy we just lost. Not that I’m saying that I think Kieboom is Rendon. Just saying there is a non zero chance that he is a pretty good hitter next year. If him and Robles step up. Honestly we might be feeling about Rendon like did this year about Harper. Thanks for the memories...but we don’t need you or your inflated contract.
@JDBrew - Howie. Howie is the other side of the 1b time share.
I'm guessing they'll scab fill in at either 2B / 3B with Kieboom being the new "it" thing next season, followed by chasing Turner et al next season? Would be a miracle if we actually signed a decent pen instead then.
Everyone seems to be forgetting that Rizzo's MO is doing the unexpected like signing Eric Sogard or Yolmer Sanchez or trading for David Fletcher from the Angels
Post a Comment