The Nats are in a tumble. They had used a couple of decent runs (7-3 and 7-4) to offset more terrible play (5-9 and 1-7) and the mediocrity of the NL East to stay in the race up until recently but two steps back, one step forward wasn't going to work forever. The Nats are now again taking two steps back but an NL East team (the Mets) are finally making a run, putting the Nats far out of contention. 7 games as of this morning. They are further out of the Wild Card, but if you, like me, don't buy the Giants long term then it's about the same between the Nats and this too. Which isn't good but not impossible I guess.
It's been the hitting, which has been terrible, more than the pitching, which has been middling. Teams have been in holes this bad or worse before, including the Nats two years ago. but it's hard to see how these Nats climb out of this. Those Nats lost Trea in game 5, then Rendon after game 19, then Soto after game 28 (also Matt Adams after that which was not on the same level but when you have no depth left - important). They'd trickle back - Rendon on May 7th (G 35), Soto on May 11th (G39), Turner on May 17th (G 44) and you could see a scenario, if all three of these guys spent the rest of the year healthy and hit well and nothing else went wrong - they could get that Wild Card. It was a tall ask but that happened. Rendon would start every game until 157, Trea until 158, and Soto would take one day off between coming back and game 159. Rendon hit to a .983 OPS after returning, Soto a .976, Turner .839. Robles played 155 games, Eaton 151, Suzuki/Gomes caught nearly every game. Stras and Corbin made every start, Sanchez almost every start. Max did miss a few I guess but you see how they drew the inside straight here.
For this team what would that be? Everyone hurt has been back for this latest swoon for a while except maybe Strasburg. In terms of health the one thing is that Soto isn't coming back and instead likely needs time off. With him hitting very average everyone else needs to be better than expected but no one is. Schwarber and Bell are now hitting kind of like the Nats wanted but only at like 85-90%. Trea needs to get on base more. Robles needs more power. Harrison needs to be Kendrick and Castro needs to be Harrison. Even if the hitting improves, and I think at least in terms of runs scored should start to even out. The pitching faces the same issues. While we can cast Stras in the Rendon/Soto role of 2019 - a returning star finding his footing and doing great the rest of the year, the Nats still need Corbin to be better and Lester and hope 5th starter manages to keep being ok. They need the pen to keep OVERperforming while they figure out that last arm in the pen problem while also being over used because of those starter issues.
"A few key guys come back from injury, don't get hurt again and play well - nothing else goes wrong" is one thing "EVERYONE play better - nothing else go wrong" is another.
I won't do a preview of thte Braves series because it's started but suffice to say the Nats need to win the series even though it's away. They've lost a game already. The Braves had beat up on Pittsburgh but couldn't do the same to Boston and are basically relying on Acuna plus whoever is hitting (right now Contreras) to carry the team. Fried (tonight) has looked right since returning which is bad news for the Nats. Then they get Smyly who only pitches well against the Nats. Or probably the Nats are just bad.
If it starts here then first Strasburg needs to take that role assigned to him. He needs to come back and be awesome. Tonight would be a good time to start
7 comments:
This offense is just so tough to watch. It's basically an entire lineup of singly Joes that smash the ball straight into the ground. Only the White Sox have a higher GB% but at least they walk a ton so they can generate some runs.
I've been saying it for years but Kevin Long is not a good hitting coach. His claim to fame is Daniel Murphy and the "launch angle" revolution, but this season demonstrates he's no launch angle savant. Just look at Josh Bell's swing
@Harper, since our team smells right now, I'm curious of your take on Rizzo as a GM? I think he's done well in the trade market, but his drafts have been hit or miss (mostly miss).
Aside from the international signings of Soto and Robles, Rendon is the only position play to make an impact via the draft since Bryce was taken #1 overall 12 years ago. That's bad. It would be okay if any of the 7 pitchers selected in round 1 since Rendon had panned out - but they haven't. I love Rizzo, but he's whiffed in the draft. I don't give him credit for Harper and Stras because those were no-brainer picks. One could even make the argument that Rendon was a no-brainer at #6, but he took a risk with his college injury history and I give him credit for that. However, he took risks with Giolito, Fedde, and Romero and it hasn't amounted to anything*. The fact that Denaburg has thrown 20 innings in 3 years is trending towards a bust. Denaburg was a QB in high school and a thrower on the diamond and had to be convinced to play pro baseball because he threw high 90's with nothing else. That is looking looks like a bad plan. Manoah dealt for the Jays last week and he was selected 6 picks before Rutledge, who looks like he's nothing special in high A. Cavalli looks good now, but time will tell...
*I suppose you could say we wouldn't have landed Eaton and a WS without dealing Giolito. Btw, I was (and still am) in favor of that trade.
2019 looks more and more like a lucky roll of the dice. It'll have to do. And all credit to Rizzo who kept that window open.
2020 and 2021 batting lineups look more and more like the retread gambles that Jim Bowden assembled. Remember Willie Mo Pena, Elijah Dukes, Dmitri Young, Nyjer Morgan? If those AAAA guys had played at their ceiling and the stars aligned, something might have happened then.
Castro, Schwarber, Bell and Mercer --- they're as dead as the ball is supposed to be. At least Parra, in addition to getting an a occasional hit, entertained with yellow shades, dances in the dugout and Baby Shark walk-ups. On paper, 2021 had a high ceiling. On paper.
Some of us lived through the pre-2010 days and can appreciate occasional-win Nats.
Right now, we're better by record than we were at this point in 2019. Maybe someone will light a fire?
@Ole PBN -
I agree with your overall point, but I don't know how you can say Giolito is a bust. He was traded for a key piece of a WS winning team and he is currently generating excellent results while still on his rookie contract. That was a great pick at 16.
(I was on the fence on that trade, and still feel like we had slightly the worst of it -- but giving up a little expectation can be worth it, and that might be one of those times.)
But, yeah, overall, our drafts have been pretty bad, even controlling for our bonus pools and selections. Kieboom busting is a big blow for this team, and we really needed two 3s or at least one ace from among Romero, Ruteledge, Denaburg, and Cavalli. We're in a tough spot.
I think the biggest victims of the de-juiced ball are the launch angle guys. 3 years ago, a "decent-not-supermashing" hitter like Murphy realized that if you make clean contact at 20 degrees, it'll go out a lot. Now you have to really hit it *just right* to make it go out.
So maybe the Right Answer is to go back to a formula that worked in the 80s -- hit it roughly where they ain't, and run like hell.
Ole PBM: you're right about the draft being a real wasteland. I saw a thing a few years ago where it was surprisingly easy to find better talent: hire more scouts. This thing I saw (it was a long time ago, and probably on a site that's not around anymore anyway) demonstrated that simply doubling the number of scouts you have running around watching ballgames roughly doubles the career WAR of the prospects in your farm system.
Scouts are relatively cheap. Figure $100k salary, another $200k in travel costs, so $300k/yr. The nats are paying Josh Harrison $5M for "bargain league-average guy who hits okay and plays anywhere." They could have hired 13 more scouts and probably found a guy who'd eventually produce like that for the league minimum.
Throw in a few guys scouting Korea, Taiwan, Japan, etc, and you have a way to add talent to a system and also avoid a lot of the salary-cap limitations.
@Kevin Rusch
An astute observation about a neglected and underappreciated (by pointy-headed stat obsessives) aspect of organization building.
The approach taken by the Nats' (step)daddy, the Montreal Expos, illustrates your point.
Owner Charles Bronfman never squeezed nickels on scouting and player development spending, even during forced retrenchment (see: collusion, free agency, Bowie Kuhn, Marvin Miller, etc. etc.) Never. That a team that first took the field in 1969 produced Hall-of-Famers Tim Raines, Andre Dawson, Gary Carter, Vladimir Guerrero and Randy Johnson (and should-be HOFer Larry Walker; I'll debate it if you want) is a testament to their emphasis on scouting and development. (How many Nats' draftees do you suppose will enter the HOF?)
Their scouts beat the bushes, looked under rocks, and forced open locked doors to draft and develop players like Marquis Grissom, Cliff Floyd, Charles Johnson, Terry Francona, Cliff Lee, Tim Wallach, Brandon Phillips, good old Ian Desmond and even Tom Brady (yes, that Tom Brady) among countless others.
After Bronfman sold the team, le deluge: half the scouts went to Miami, half to Colorado, both teams (with the help of a bunch former Expos) becoming contenders soon thereafter.
One could burrow maniacally into a compare-and-contrast Nats vs. Expos drafting philosophy until the Apocalypse, sure. And one could make a case, I suppose, for either.
But if there is one crucial difference that separates the two, I think, it's this: Montreal loved to draft players who recognized the business end of a bat. Washington loves hard-throwing, 6'5", 235lb pitchers who hurt their arms trying to throw through the business end of a bat.
Thus endeth this cheesy sermon.
Post a Comment