That might be saying a bit much but I'm going to list the Nationals under contract for 2025.
- Stephen Strasburg
- Keibert Ruiz
That's it. The Nats have plenty of guys under control but exactly zero of them have the Nats made a longer term commitment to. Not saying they should have just noting what is going on.
Keibert had an down and up year last year at the plate. The guy we saw in the first half, particularly from May on simply should not be a starter in the major leagues. The guy we saw in the second half might be the best hitting catcher in baseball. Yes, it's not a great list but still he had the same OPS in the 2nd half as Rutschman had for the year.
For a young player, and Keibert is still young, this matters. It might mean he's learning something. Ruiz is always swinging and always making contact so the type of contact he makes matters and he's the best it seems when he's leaning into his strengths. From the right side that means keeping the ball down and getting hits. From the left that means getting the ball up. From both sides it seems like he did his best when he was a little more selective but really getting ahead of the pitches and pulling them. Not hitting them any harder mind you. So what is going on? Just a guess but by pulling it I imagine there is a split second less time for infielders to react on the right side, a few feet closer to the fence from the left side. Normally that might not make a big difference but when you are constantly putting the ball in play like Keibert, that adds up more.
That is it with Ruiz. He's not going to strike out so he just needs to get as many solid bats on balls as possible. Very few hit the ball as correctly as Ruiz but also nearly all the league hits it harder. It's a weird combo being able to square the ball up really well but with nothing behind it.
I'm rambling. The point is 2nd half Ruiz did hit the ball differently so there's a possibility that 2nd half offensive Ruiz could continue. And that's important as he's not a great fielder (might be terrible) and he's the only guy the Nats are counting on right now. When you make only one move that move better be a good one.
Ruiz is fine.
ReplyDeleteBut if the Lerners are going to run this team like the expos 5 years out of every 12, forget it.
They _could_ be out there signing "ok" guys to at least make the team watchable and/or trade away for parts. But nope - gotta run the team on Tampa money and then whine about MASN.
God help me, I'm more excited about the Redskins than the Nats.
Kevin - wait until March 1 to complain. There will likely be reason but lets not get ahead of ourselves. Plenty of ok guys still out there
ReplyDeleteWell, complaining today is easier than doing my day job. :-)
ReplyDeleteBut seriously, my issue is with the direction philosophy. I totally understand tanking to get draft picks, and trading away value.
BUT, it's not like the Lerners are poor, and DC is Kansas City or Tampa. Sure, the MASN deal sucks, but that's taking away at most $10M from what they deserve, not $50M. $30M in "roughly average MLB talent" would make a big difference -- grab an OK starting pitcher and an OK lefty power bat. They're going to have those needs for a couple years anyway, so just bite the bullet and grab a few guys and check them off the shopping list. If it turns out all the prospects flourish (yeah right) you can trade the free agent signings away for role players. (Eat their salary and you'll even restock the farm while you're at it -- at the moment, those would just be more guys whose careers you can ruin, but let's assume for the sake of discussion they can fix some of those problems.)
Right now the only thing standing between the current Nats and an 85-win team is their checkbook, and I'm really not interested in watching them lose 100+ games a year for 5 years out of every 12 until they can win 95 games on a mid-tier payroll. And if their bad luck and/or track record with Boras clients who've come and gone has permanently ruined their desire to even participate, then sell and let someone else do it.
Kevin, if the Nats pull out their checkbooks to buy an 85-win team, they will never have a 92-win team. Too much market-priced talent is a sure road to mediocrity. However, I agree with your basic point, although I'll ratchet my requisite wins to 75. If they don't pick up somebody who could be at least a #3 pitcher on a good team for the next 3-4 years, they will lose both fans and some future. Plus a short-term lefthanded bat would be nice, but has little to do with the future.
ReplyDeleteAnon: Baseball really isn't like the other sports, where you need a 1-1 pick to ever get up off the mat. The Dodgers, Braves, and Yankees have outrageous talent pipelines and never pick first. Besides, with the lottery now, the Nats can't pick before #11, so they might as well be decent. You can sign mid-level talent affordably and trade them away when you have better options in-house.
ReplyDeleteWhich brings me back to my point - the Lerners are acting like this is a Pittsburgh/KC/Tampa market, and it simply isn't. They have the resources to at least average a #10 payroll (roughly $180M) and they haven't been anywhere close to that. And they had a deal to sell the team for 95% of what they wanted, but bailed when they couldn't get 100% of it. And instead they've been sitting and letting the team rot. Do they think Leonsis is going to up his offer after another season of 4-digit attendance?
I guess it's possible that the real Long Game goal here is to alienate enough fans that they actually hurt MASN's bottom line, then the Angelos family lets them out of the deal. But I don't feel like waiting to out-live the stupidest Angelos son.
ReplyDeleteI truly don't understand Kiebert's batted ball profile. Dude is one of the best in terms of sweet spot %, and one of the worst in terms of Exit Velocity. I can't find any good spot personally that measures it, but that has to be tied to bat speed. Like he's swinging cautiously and guiding the bat more than trying to let it rip. If he can figure out a way to sacrifice a little bit on the accuracy to get more power, he will be competing with Adley for best C in baseball
ReplyDelete@Kevin Rusch - they were offered 95% of what they wanted? I don't remember the numbers reported
ReplyDeleteI know that speculating is fun....but I doubt the accuracy of what is being described as "Leonis offered 95% and the Lerner's declined." The offer could have been tied to any number of conditions that could have dramatically altered the value of the offer. The obvious ones would have involved broadcast rights and guaranteed minimum revenue from MASN.
ReplyDeleteThe Ohtani contract is a good example of how confusing these things can be. Did he get $700 million or $460 million? They are actually both true--but what you think of his deal is closely tied to how it is characterized.
The final reason to be skeptical: good, smart business people rarely get to 95% and fail to close a deal. There are always things to horse trade so everyone leaves the table thinking they got a fair deal. Maybe the Lerner's are asking for too much but that is only one possible interpretations of what is known.
Ryan: https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/04/19/ted-leonsis-washington-nationals/
ReplyDeleteSo, not specifically 95%, but the jist is that they disagreed over the fair market value of the MASN payments, and decided not to sell rather than to take what they could get. Until then, they're in limbo and running the team poorly (and reducing its value) while they decide if they're going to fish, cut bait, or eat old sushi.
I took the $2 billion ish total as more like 50-60% of the way there at the time, I don't think it was all that close to getting done and we haven't heard a thing about them selling since
ReplyDelete@Kevin: FWIW the Nationals' draft restriction was only for the 2024 draft, when they could not draft higher than #10 (which is the slot that they have for the first round. They are drafting in the #5 spot in each of the subsequent rounds.
ReplyDeleteFurther, the penalty is a one off. If they don't make the playoffs in 2024 (easy bet) then they go into the lottery and get what they get. Ironically, in the lottery for the 2024 draft numbers for the Nationals were actually drawn for the #1 AND the #2 pick. But the Nats weren't eligible for those picks so it didn't count. Under Murphy's Law, we can assume that they will be hosed in the lottery for next year's draft.
Oakland has really been screwed by the lottery two years running, and now even as a team that gets revenue sharing money they cannot draft higher than #10 in the 2025 draft even if they lose 120 games.
I have to say it's a pretty cheap shot to say "The Nats have committed to nobody but Ruiz from 2025 on" (not to mention commentary jumping from there to saying the Lerners have given up on putting together a winning team). The hand-wavy "well, they haven't extended any of the others yet!" ignores a lot of context.
ReplyDeleteThe hand-wave is of course technically true--but silly--because the NextGen Nats core IS by definition controlled for several years. Nats have gone from "old, bad and dismal future" to "young, bad and some hope for future." Heck, having already signed ONE potential core player to a long term extension arguably puts the Nats AHEAD of most MLB teams. *
* I DO think Nats should be in possible extension talks with CJ Abrams. But the simple fact that the Nats DID sign Ruiz to an extension says the Nats ARE trying to extend their young core players. If they did it with Ruiz why do we assume they're NOT trying it with other players?
The "Nats have nobody committed long term after 2024!" argument simply tosses the facts below right out of the equation. The NextGen Nats potential core includes:
Through 2025: Hunter Harvey, Tanner Rainey, Kyle Finnegan, Lane Thomas
None of these guys are likely part of the window 2026-2030, sure. I mean, how many would YOU extend right now? But they can help the "2012" season in 2025.
2025-2027, free agency 2028: Mackenzie Gore, Josiah Gray, Luis Garcia
If you smoke something, Riley Adams
2025-2028, free agency 2029: CJ Abrams
If you squint hard, Stone Garrett
If you smoke something, Joey Meneses (good story, don't extend)
2025-2029, free agency 2030: Cade Cavalli
If you squint hard, Jackson Rutledge
If you smoke something, Jacob Young, Drew Millas,
2025-2030: Jake Irvin, Keibert Ruiz (club options for 2031-32)
If you squint hard, Zach Brzykcy, DJ Herz
If you smoke something, Thaddeus Ward, Mitchell Parker
2025?-2030?: Dylan Crews, James Wood, Brady House
Yeah, the "squint hard" and "smoke something" guys aren't likely to ever be All-Stars. Hoping for 1-2 MLB regular hits out of that crowd and maybe one at most of the "smoking something" crowd. But it's not an empty roster either. "Young and bad" can get better; "old and bad" is...bad.
And this doesn't factor in any hits from the pile of VERY unproven (as opposed to "promising but not yet proven") prospects from Green down through maybe Pinckney. Which seems fair because some core names above will no doubt fall short of projections.
Point is trying to insinuate Nationals management has checked out and is halfway out of town because "only one guy besides Stras is on the roster for 2025+" is a weak argument.
The Nats HAVE already extended one part of what they hope to be their next window's core (Ruiz, obviously). Having at least one young player extended well before free agency arguably puts the Nationals AHEAD of most other MLB teams. That is simple truth.
To say otherwise--to say that 'cuz the Lerners have only signed one NextGen Nats core player to an extension proves they don't care or something--is to ignore how most MLB teams operate. Look at the Angelosians--they have a VERY exciting young core and they're taking FIVE OF THEM TO ARBITRATION. Now THAT'S being stupid cheap.
If the Nats can extend more of the young core above a la Atlanta--great! It *might* tamp down "Lerners don't care any more" talk. Though I would then look forward to extended commentary along the lines of "Yeah, we said extend someone--but not THAT guy!!!"
To me the even sadder aspect of all this is that if a sale does happen it will be to Leonisis. Do we really think things will get better? Check out the Wizards record (worst franchise in professional sports), and, to a lesser extent, the Caps, and the proposed move to Alexandria. Would a sale help anything? And in the mean time do they realy expect me to continue to pay an enormous amount for my season tickets while they suck big time? Very sad.
ReplyDelete