The PECOTA projections, used by Baseball Prospectus are out and boy do they hate the Nats. So much so they have the Nats as the 2nd worst team in all of baseball.
Projections are projections and you can buy into any one them if you like. For the most part you should look at a bunch and see if there is a pattern. Like for instance, Fangrpahs projections which... also have the Nats as the 2nd worst team in all of baseball albeit with about 8 more wins.
For what it's worth fangraphs "smushes" more than PECOTA going for a more "closer to the truth" on any one team, while PECOTA allows for more tail length, going for a more "this is what a regular season would probably look like"
So the Nats are probably more 66 than 58 but why are they so hated to begin with. What in the numbers says never bet on red?
It has the Nats regressing both at the plate (40 fewer runs) and on the mound (40 more runs). Offensively you can see it. The Nats are replacing 125 games of Jeimer Candelario (125 OPS+ with Nats in 2023) with Nick Senzel (85 OPS+ in 2023) that's a huge drop in production and last year was Senzel's best since 2019. You weight that more but also the other years were 55, 67, and 66. There's no denying a HUGE step back is likely.
They also buy into an increase playing time for Carter Kieboom and his history of terribleness. Alex Call still being around for 200+PA) and increases in PA but my guess is understandable decreases in production from Stone Garrett and Victor Robles. The former I bet washes out - slightly less productive but slightly more PAs. But Robles' history (66, 69 ,69 OPS+ 2020-2022) has to trump his 40 games of good play last year.
On the positive side there is Joey Gallo replacing Dom Smith. Even I, someone that doesn't like Gallo, notes that it wouldn't take much for him to replace Dom's 92 OPS+. Granted he's been up and down but put him just under 100 OPS+ and it's something. But it's also not enough to make up for the above.
The hope that they are wrong comes from the youth and some decision making. No one particularly looks to be a break out candidate next year but there are a bunch that it's possible. Ruiz, Garcia, Abrams, all could or Wood or Crews or another minor leaguer could rocket. You can't really project that so none likely do for PECOTA but maybe one will? A more reasonable hope is if Kieboom is playing that much (420PA) he's better than he has been or else the slightly better Vargas would be playing. That would likely create a few more runs.
Still I think I agree I'd bet on the Nats scoring fewer runs than more. So to keep up a 67 win rate statistically they need to pitch better. But here we have them pitching worse. Relief wise I imagine it is what it is. Finnegan should be worse by stats, Thompson better. They have some decent arms but no depth so I don't imagine much change. The added runs more likely come from the SP slot. You have an older Corbin who had his best season in years in 2023, a Trevor Williams who seemingly has confirmed he's not a starter, a wobbly Josiah Gray and a replacement level Jake Irvin. All outdid their FIP. That's unlikely to happen again. I'd bet on Corbin, Williams, and Irvin all being worse and with no one reliable to replace them with you have to rely on Gray and Gore to get a step better each (or Cavalli to be immediately ok).
I'm going to guess that Gray is not projected to get much better (improvement countered by the fact his ERA was beating what it probably should be) so the big thing here is probably Gore's performance. PECOTA looks at the last few years and has him throwing only 115 innings. If he gets better AND pitches more than last year that could be a solid improvement. But like the offense probably not enough to make up for the likely negatives.
None of this is particularly unexpected but it's stark to see it laid out. The Nats were not good last year. They got rid of more talent then they brought in. No young player ready to start the year on the major league roster has a strong break out potential. The pitching depth at starter is extremely weak and the rotation is already among the worst in the majors. If you project that out as expected you have a team worse than last year.
But the Nats aren't relying on "as expected" performances from late 20 year old vets. They are relying on highly variable performances from guys 25 and under. This allows for the potential for something much greater. Without any real FA moves it's a lottery season. It's a gamble. The Nats are at the craps table looking to roll 7s and that means it could be real fun but it's more likely to be pretty bad. The house usually wins. Hope that means Brady.
Well, what they're really relying on is having a bunch of highly-touted prospects (who PECOTA doesn't have enough information about) to be ready to play in the bigs, and while those guys aren't likely to have a big impact on the record, they're hoping those guys placate the pitchforks crowd.
ReplyDeleteBut yes, they'll probably get to squander another pretty high draft pick in 2025 too.
Honestly, that's all fair enough. This team is close to enough to terrible that it doesn't take too much bad luck (which could even be just the absence of good luck) to be a 100 loss team. There's a nonzero chance none of the prospects play this year, and the most likely outcome is probably that we only get partial seasons of one bat and Cavalli. Add in the possibility / hope of trading Thomas, Harvey and/or Finnegan and you can certainly tell a believable story of us being the worst team in baseball.
ReplyDeleteBut if a bookie were offering 58.5 at -110, I'd be willing to bet the over pretty big. At 66, or wherever the actual lines are, I'm not so interested.
I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a significant step up from Gore this season. For one, control is his big issue and many pitchers as they develop figure that out. Not to say he will, but it's not unreasonable to expect that. Second, he threw the most innings of his career by far last year, and the wheels fell off big time when he was dealing with blisters (July and Sept). If you throw out those months, he was a solid 4.00 ERA pitcher. Third, his stats fell off significantly the third time through the order. Now that happens to a lot of pitchers, so that may stay consistent, but as he gets stronger and stretched out, it's not unreasonable to expect the dropoff the third time through to be mitigated to an extent, given the level he's currently at (6+ ERA, .800+ OPS).
ReplyDeleteI also think Abrams has a solid chance to step up, and my fingers are crossed that Kieboom can become at least a slightly below average major leaguer similar to Garcia
Biggest difference between 2022 and 2023 Nats was the former were largely "old and bad" while the latter were largely "young and bad." There is upside possible in "young and bad" an "old and bad" team doesn't have. Rooting for the kids is also more fun.
ReplyDeleteThe biggest weakness not addressed for the 2024 Nats is starting pitching depth. After Cavalli went down the 2023 Nats had no significant starting pitcher injuries. How often does THAT happen? Is it a good idea to assume that happens again?
Let's take a hard look.
ReplyDeleteOF - Crews is probably going to show up, play CF, and hit well from June onward. Someone will fill in until then. Stone Garrett will be a slightly-better-than-average LF, Lane Thomas same in right. The other prospects can't be counted on until August at the earliest, and are you ready to _expect_ Hassell or Wood to be ready? I'm not.
3b - yikes. Vargas is a great find when you just need a body, but unless House or YoYo Morales is ready by May, that's gonna be ugly.
SS, we're fine.
2B - I'll be shocked if Garcia figures things out. So, Darren Baker? Sure, it's nice to see him or Alu for a bit, but they're almost certain to be well below average.
1B - Meneses's 2022 is probably his best you can hope for. That'd be nice, but he's at the age where he's likely to decline. Gallo? Sure, I suppose.
C- Set. In fact, I think they should carry 3 catchers and have them rotate through C, DH, and reserve. Millas and Ruiz are switch-hitters, and Adams kills lefties, so you should be able to figure something out.
Rotation - this is gruesome.
Every Corbin start is 1 start closer to him being off the payroll.
It's reasonable to think that Gore has a good chance of improving. I think that's different from expecting him to improve. If he doesn't, he's a good 4th starter.
Same for Gray, though being a bit older, maybe not. 3/4 guy?
Irvin and Rutledge were pleasant surprises. Keep in mind, their best pitching draftee since Strasburg is a pleasant surprise of a #5 starter.
Let's assume Cavalli is ready by June. So, #3 starter? The rotation then would be 3 #3s, Corbin, and Irvin/Rutledge. I mean, that'll keep you in a lot of games, sure. But you'd better have a wicked lineup.
Bullpen is fine - surely some people will come and go, but they got a bunch of serviceable arms.
If you were looking at the Somewheresville Somebodies, how many wins would you peg them for? 70, tops. Oh, and they get to play the Barves and Phillies a lot, and while they're better on paper than the Marlins, they'll always lose to them too.
You can't be surprised that PECOTA hates the Nats. I don't hate the Nats, but I don't expect them to win much.
I just.. I'm not saying the nats need to go get The Best Guy Available, but clearly the plan is that 60 wins are fine until 2 sure-fire hall-of-famers show up, and you better enjoy them while you can because you know damn well they're never signing an extension here. Until then, they could have signed any number of guys to $10-13M one-year deals (or, gasp!, some starting pitcher for several years, since it's pretty obvious they're going to need at least one average-or-better rotation member for a while) and either used them to make the team credible and/or traded them for a prospect in July. That's a way to turn cash into prospects, but since the Lerners seem to think we're in Kansas City, we're stuck hoping Carter Keiboom is better than Ildemaro Vargas and Darren Baker is better than Luis Garcia.
And since it's the Lerners, they won't sell for 90% of what the team is worth -- instead they'll hang on to it and drive the value of the team down 20% by encouraging dozens of fans to come out and watch and blaming MASN, Baltimore, and Scott Boras for all 95 losses.
Sorry to be a downer, but I try hard to find the upside in this team, and even if everything pans out, this won't be much good. And the team's really not being run in a way to generate any confidence that they'll get there (and don't even think about staying there) any time soon.
Rusch, you sound to me like an extreme optimist. Crews and Cavalli by June? Why? The Nats have zero reason to do that. This will be another grind of a year but with less of everything. I keep getting ticket sales calls, and I last bought a mini package in 2018. No one is buying tickets because they know this will be a sad sack team.
ReplyDeleteKevin, I broadly agree with you, but have to quibble on extensions. While it's turned out to be a travesty of a deal, the Lerners did sign Strasburg. Also brought in Scherzer on a major contract. History tells us they'll spend given the right circumstances. The massive caveat here is whether they'll spend while they're also trying to sell the team.
ReplyDeleteI'm just excited to watch Abrams and Gore progress this year, their progress will change the win total more than I think anyone on their 25 man roster
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYou make a fair point about the Diamondbacks. The last era of Nats spending was back when a team likely needed 90 wins to make the playoffs. Now it's closer 85, which makes me wonder how Rizzo has adapted to that calculus. I assume he has or wants to, and the fault lies with the Lerners wanting to sell the team without any big new contracts attached.
ReplyDeleteAlso, with Leonsis trying to move the Caps out of DC, I'm personally relieved he didn't manage to buy the team (yet, at least).
I am hopeful that the Orioles sale process will help address the MASN issue to allow the Lerner’s to sell the Nats. MLB owners have an interest in facilitating a Nats sale as it would likely increase the value of their own franchises.
ReplyDeleteI would join the chorus of pessimism. I was really disappointed that the Nats didn’t do more to improve, particularly at 2b and in the rotation. I get that you don’t want to invest in 3b with House on the way. Don’t agree that they shouldn’t have tried to find a Candelario type for 3b to flip, but fine. But there is no long term plan at 2b.
For SP, it’s been an interesting FA market. The “aces” outside Ohtani and Yamamoto available aren’t super convincing for me — I think Snell and Montgomery are…unreliable as 1s and they will want 1 money. Then there were a ton of basically 3-4-5 types, which the Nats effectively have three of already in Gore, Gray and Cavalli. But it’s still disappointing nonetheless. I am just not sure where their top 2 pitchers are going to come from.
I'm not joining the chorus of pessimism even as I think the Nats need to sign another starting pitcher to have any real shot at improving on their 71-win 2023.
ReplyDeleteI get it, it's been a long winter and seems like a longer rebuild. But you can look it up--both the Astros and the Orioles rebuilds lasted longer and stunk worse than the Nats current rebuild. Remember that 55-107 smoking crater of 2022? The Orioles put together three straight full seasons WORSE than that! The 2011-2013 Astros lost 106, 107 and 111 games before going 70-92 in 2014 (up from there, of course).
I have no illusions about Senzel or Gallo, nor do I think Joey M is going to suddenly become 2022 half-season Joey. But the NextGen Nats are a mix of here (Abrams, Ruiz, Gore, Gray--maybe Garrett and Young as viable placeholders) and on the cusp (Crews, Wood, House). As I've said, "young and bad" is both more entertaining and more hopeful than "old and bad."
As for "60 wins are fine until 2 sure-fire hall-of-famers show up, and you better enjoy them while you can because you know damn well they're never signing an extension here"...I disagree on multiple levels.
- I think the Nats are targeting 2025 as their first year of serious competing and are making plans accordingly
- The Nats are arguably at least average if not better than average in MLB at extending young stars. Strasburg's first extension was GREAT for the player, fans and team. Ryan Zimmerman was extended (after which the fan buzz became complaining about it). Now Keibert Ruiz has signed a team-friendly extension of the kind that the Braves have been doing.
Yeah, most "Hall of Fame" players do NOT extend--because those guys are likely to go for the Big Rock Candy Mountain of $300+M contracts. I think the Nats are TRYING to sign reasonable win-win extensions (see Ruiz, Keibert). But MLB players fought hard for the right to go to free agency and the vast majority opt to do so when they get there.
It may sting a bit more for Nats fans when players CHOOSE to exercise their hard-fought right to free agency because we've been remarkably lucky. Seriously, the two players tied for "Most MLB HR hit as a teenager" in *MLB HISTORY* did so as Washington Nationals. In the same decade. Even played together on same team in 2018! That's ridiculous good luck and I'm happy to take that!
In summary, I don't expect the Nats to be a playoff contender in 2024. But I will be looking for the green shoots that could support a playoff run in 2025 and well beyond that--and in the interim look forward to watching the New Kidz play. There's enough bad happening in the world, why focus on the negative in baseball?