The Nats are not as good as the Braves. They will likely win 20-30 games fewer than the Braves this season. Yet, last night the Nats pitching executed and their hitting executed and they got lucky and they won going away 11-2. Such is life in a sport when the worst team wins 40% of their games and the best team 60%.
Rogers pitched well but given that he doesn't miss bats and isn't particularly great with control, he is basically at the mercy of the baseball gods every time out. They will put the ball in play. Will it go at someone or not? When one does go through will it be after the guy I put on with a walk or before? There's no reason to believe this is sustainable UNLESS he can keep the ball in the park at a crazy rate. However, the Nats don't really have better options. Arano and Harvey pitched well. Cesar and Yadi and Franco and Lane went a combined 10-18 with two walks and two doubles and a homer. Yes, the Nats will win games when that happens.
Arguably tonight is the first game with any sort of import the Nats will have this year, though it's of the "Huh. Not sure what's going on. We should win this game" variety. The Braves know they should pick up wins against teams like the Nats, especially at home. A loss drops them to 2-4, has them no better than splitting the series against DC, and could put them 2.5 behind PHI and in last place depending how the night goes. None of that REALLY matters. They could be in first place by the weekend. But it doesn't feel right, and the Braves are a team right now that want to feel right given that their iconic player left because they didn't want to pay him. They don't want that to be a thing.
6 comments:
Are teams who lose iconic players (because the teams don't want to pay them) worse off always, sometimes, or perhaps never?
If Bryce might be regarded as iconic, we can draw some conclusions, I suppose, about the 2019 Nats, but not necessarily the correct ones.
Too many variables to consider if one is looking for a rule of thumb. Maybe I'll set aside some foot-dangling time to explore this.
My bet it's a mixed bag. Most would get worse - just because you've lost a great player - but if it's a little worse or a lot would probably depend more on the total direction of the team. Are they tearing down or still trying and just didn't want to pay this guy that much? And some that are still trying will probably get better just by the variable nature of annual performances.
So it'd be fun to look at but I doubt there'd be any strong conclusions. Like you said too many variables. Even only three years out things would be completely different (see Nats)
Thank you, Harper. Guess I'll save my foot-dangling time for foot-dangling.
You can read this whilst you dangle https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/24052595/what-happens-star-players-leave-teams-their-peak
Missing from the ESPN list are the 2004 Red Sox, who traded their 5x-All Star, Rookie of the Year, longest tenured veteran* Nomar Garciaparra mid-season (replacing him with . . . Pokey Reese) en route to winning their epoch-defining World Series title.
*(Varitek and Pedro Martinez didn't join the Sox until 1998, the year after NoMAH won ROY. Big Papi didn't arrive until 2003).
I was having issues in my marriage because my husband wants a divorce but I was able to get him to cancel the divorce with the help of a spiritual man called PRIEST OSAS and now we are living in peace. If you are facing any kind of problem in life and want a lasting solution, PRIEST OSAS is the right man for the job. I'm a living testimony of his great power. He also prepares herbs for any kind of sickness you know about, he works wonders and miracles, I thank my stars I reached out to him for help
CONTACT +14193594367
Post a Comment