Monday Quickie - The more things stay the same, the more things change

The Nats season is over. They finished 71-91 which is the same record they had last year, but while the numbers are the same, forward progress was clearly made. Last year, they were arguably a low 60s win team by various measures that somehow found itself over 70. This year they were the low 70s win team that they ended up as.

Results like 2023, where the W/L don't match the stats can be caused by "coin flip luck". You happen to get a few more dribblers through with men on base. The opponent hits a few more fly balls to the deepest part of the park. Results like 2024 can also be caused by luck though. Several players finding themselves having years that might be the best of their career, or that one late career bounce back, all at the same time gets you deserved wins but wins you can't count on continuing on*. Trevor Williams pitching like a Cy Young contender for 1/3 of the season can only be described as shocking, but nothing else felt out of order. Rather it felt like the Nats having one of those season where more works out than doesn't and when it's mostly with kids rather than vets beating expectations, you can't dismiss that. Maybe you also can't count on it, but you can certainly get interested in what the future can hold. 

Offensively this season was quietly a bit worse. The Nats made a few bets on veteran bats, some good some inexplicable (hey it's Nick Senzel's music! Which, by the way, is a sad trombone). Like Candelario last year, one really paid off in Jesse Winker. You had a couple guys do well last year it was Thomas and Garrett this year Wood and Garcia Jr. But whereas last year the rest of the lineup was mostly guys below average with one or two stinkers, this year the Nats had a lot of the latter. Last year only Alex Call got more than 200 PA (439) and put up a OPS+ under 85. This year Keibert Ruiz did it (485), Joey Meneses did it (313), Vargas (303), Gallo (260), Rosario (235), and Lipscomb (211).  That's a lot of stink!

But you can certainly argue that outside of Ruiz none of these results were all that important, and while Thomas and Garrett doing well last year was nice, Wood and Garcia Jr doing well this year was important. So the offense was worse but in a way you feel better about where it can go. 

On the mound the Nats improved across the board. Last year the pen was a solid three guys and then a bunch of terrible choices. This year their FA signings worked out well and they watched as almost a full pen of guys threw... well mostly just ok. But a 4.50 ERA is world's better than a 6.50 ERA. All in all this helped elevate the Nats from "really bad after the top" to "below average mix". That kind of improvement matters but probably only would have balanced the lack of hitting by itself. 

No the huge difference was in the starting pitching.  The Nats were bad last year with a lot of bad starters being bad. This year they were still not good but resembled the "rest of the lineup" from the 2023 Nats. A lot of below average guys being below average. Irvin, Parker, and Herz didn't have good results, but they were good enough to keep the team in the game and that slight difference was big enough to matter. And much like with Wood and Garcia, the fact that it was two younger pitchers doing that in Parker and Herz makes you think maybe the Nats can get lucky and one will make the next step. 

We'd be remiss if we didn't talk about the baserunning. The Nats lead the majors in SB and while their success rate dropped it still managed to be around 75% which is about what it needs to be to be a positive. Add in the general disruptiveness of that game plan and it's another new plus.

Defense? They were worse. You might think Jacob Young would have made an impact but him and Call (another excellent fielder) only played like 16% more innings this year. Meanwhile you lost all of Candelario's contribution at 3B and he was very good. While Garcia looks better guys like Abrams and Thomas took big steps back from already not great positions. This is one place for concern moving forward as while Crews does appear to be good, Wood does not. The defense will likely be bad with a couple of bright spots, rather than the preferred, good covering a couple of holes. 

But look at the scoreboard and see how much that matters. The defense didn't stop the Nats from being much better and that will likely be the case again next year. Of course now we get to the main point.

The Nats season wasn't good in a vacuum but it was good for the future. You have the pieces for the potential next run either here (Ruiz, Garcia, Abrams, Wood, Crews, maybe Young or one of the late season guys, Gore, Brzykcy, maybe Irvin, Parker, Herz or Ferrar) or coming soon (House, Yohandy, Lara, Grissom Jr, maybe Lile). The team is ready to try to make the next step. But the next step is big. 

The Phillies, Braves and Mets may be at various stages of their competitive cycles but the simple truth is in 2024 they were all at least 15 games better than the Nats and it wasn't by luck. They are that much better. The Braves and the Mets are the teams fighting for the playoffs. That's the first goal line. High 80s in wins.

If the Nats want to simply get better they can probably follow a similar plan to this year with maybe grabbing a more reliable FA SP to at least take up an inning eating role. Do that, watch the kids improve (or not) and come up (or not) and probably win 5+ more games. But that's only 75-80 wins, still a good bit from the playoffs. No, if they want to feel like they are really making a push they need to be serious actors in the FA market. They have been before, so we can have some hope, but times change. Already they have started this run differently by not grabbing that Werth-like big FA in assumption that the team would come together. What else might be different? 

2024 was not exactly what you wanted as a Nats fan but it was probably what you could reasonably expect a positive year to be. You didn't have a lucky run to .500, the Nats weren't really ever playoff relevant, beginning their slide well in advance of when playoff spots are thought about, and they didn't have a breakout star. But more happened good than bad and the kids got to the majors on time. The team became a team you could watch and expect a competitive, if not exactly winning, baseball game. 

Now what you can reasonably expect for 2025 in my mind, is a couple big FA signings and a team that looks like a good bet for .500 while it watches the kids and figures out where the last couple pieces need to be to make the playoffs. Will we get that? Let's find out.

 

*Wanted to note with Zaidi out in SF this is EXACTLY how SF won 107 games a few years ago. Buster Posey, Evan Longoria and Alex Wood had their last good seasons. Belt, Crawford, Ruf, Duggar, Gausman, and DeScalfini all had their best years ever (ok best 2year block for Belt).   No one basically underperformed. It was what happens when EVERYTHING goes right for a team that should win like 80-85 games. All those +1 WARs add up into something crazy.

How are the Kids doing #3 - MacKenzie Gore

The short take on Gore's 2024 is that he got better but didn't become the ace the Nats hoped for. But probably most importantly he was healthy the whole year completing over 30 starts, something not given based on Gore's injury history. If this is all he is - a solid dependable #3 type - then that is enough, though the potential remains for more. 

The big difference between this year and last was a return to a more balanced repertoire. Gore kind of gave up on his change last year focusing more on his swing and miss pitches and control of those.  The result was an increase in strikeouts and a decrease in walks, as hoped but also an increase in home runs. Guys could guess what he'd throw. They didn't guess right often and his stuff was still good - his hard hit % stayed about the same- but when they were right they punished him.  This year he incorporated more changeups and the results were notable. A big drop in hard hit%, a big drop in homers, a big drop in barrels. Opponents were more off balance. Yes adding back in a pitch they didn't swing and miss much at meant they put the ball in play more and that means more hits but he was able to maintain his control. The control of power with roughly the same K and BB rate meant a better pitcher.

Where can Gore improve to take the next step? It's making a jump forward in control. Although he managed to improve his control last year, it was only from "this cannot continue" to "one of the wildest starters in the game". Maintaining that for this year was important, while adding back in his change, but if he's going to be a top of the rotation type he's going to have to cut it way down, by like half a walk a game or more. And it's a balancing act. If having more control means giving up more homers there a point where it won't be worth it. 

I'm not exactly sure he can make this step.  While the HR bump in 2023 was an aberration, he'd pretty much always kept the ball in the park, the walk issue has dogged him for a while. Simply having strong stuff kept it down in the very low minors. Guys would chase more. But that isn't the case now. Without a sense that the control can come I don't know if it's something we should expect. 

On the positive side though he really should be getting slightly better results this year and his ERA should be just on the other side of 4.00 as opposed to the higher end. 

As Gore is hitting 26 there's limited time for real improvement. One of the least talked about truths in sport is you generally show what you are very quickly. Gore's improvement shows importantly that he's able to put together the best version of what he is, but 2024 might be it. 

I'd say personally I'm satisfied with Gore. There is a LOT of value in a good healthy #3 type. Sure, I want him to be an ace, but that's probably not going to happen. I'd bet against it. What I'd now hope for is for him to continue to improve. Moving from a 4.00 ERA type to a 3.50+ ERA type that he should be able to do with some minor changes and better luck.  That's more of a solid if not exciting #2 and the type that can give the rotation stability. 

Gore won't be a kid after this year but how did the kid do? Pretty good. 

Things you should watch

While waiting for me to get less busy so I can do a couple more "How 'dem kids doing"

Right now in the AL the divisions are all but set. There's a "Yankees lose all, Orioles win all" scenario still in play but that's about it. Same thing for a bye between the Guardians and Astros*. It's all about the Wild Card where the Royals and Tigers are fending off the Twins and Mariners (we'll bring up the Red Sox Friday if they still matter) for the final two spots

Mariners @ Astros (afternoon game today)

Rays @ Tigers 

Royals @ Nats- Hey the Nats matter!

Marlins @ Twins

In the NL The NL West is still up for grabs and the Padres are making their last play. Basically needing the sweep they started off with the win. The Phillies are pretty much set as 1 or 2 though, and Brewers as 3. So the rest is the Wild Card where the Mets, Dbacks, and Braves are struggling over their last two spots

Padres @ Dodgers (late night baseball!) 

Mets @ Braves

Giants @ Dbacks

This weekend the Padres go to Arizona and the Royals finish in Atlanta for two series that are good bet to have some intrigue. The rest - Tigers are hosting the White Sox, Dodgers are at the Rockies, Mets in Milwuakee, Baltimore at Minnesota, and the Mariners host Oakland. 

Baseball really does have an advantage here over other sports with this end of the year lots of games that could matter thing that happens. It's fun!  

Player-wise not much. Ohtani got to 50/50 already.  Judge could hit 60 but isn't going to blow by it. FWIW - Judge and Ohtani will be the only ones to get to 50, Santander is next at 44.  Soto got to 40 for the first time in his career.  Kind of crazy though that we are in a world now where homers rule batting average and only 8 or so guys will hit over .300, but Judge is definitely going to be one and Ohtani might be another. Even if he hits like .295 he did steal 50 bases. These guys are so good. Also Bobby Witt (only 32 homers) is going to have one of the best non-MVP seasons in a while.

There will be no 20 game winner this year.  Both Skubal and Sale have a chance to get to 19. This could be the first season ever where no one tops 210 IP in the major leagues. A couple guys should (only need 5 1/3 but just a couple guys have a shot).  This is all just a past decade change. The four man rotation died in the 70s as did the "Everyone goes as long as they can" with the advent of closers. By the mid 80s things settled around 250-275 IP with a few outliers. That mostly held for 20 years then in the mid 2000s we saw another drop, presumably for 7th and 8th inning guys coming in. Innings stuck around 225-250 until about a decade ago when we started getting the "no third time around" rule coming in.  

What is this all for? Do pitchers dominate? Nope. Do we have fewer injuries? Doesn't seem like it. I guess a team would have an advantage if everyone else wasn't also doing it. And injuries are a set cost so we accept X many and scale the effort in each pitch to that injury level. Seems pointless to me. 

Again my re-framing of the SP role is that if you are only going to ask 5-6 innings of them, we should go back to 4 man rotations. There's never been a real indication that INNINGS matter, as opposed to pitches per start. Anyway watch some baseball

*Also I don't care about HFA through the playoffs.  Things happen.

Monday Quickie - Nats lose a bunch, Abrams demoted

 Since taking care of the Marlins and looking like shoo-ins for a lot of their seasons goals (ok MY season goals) the Nats have collapsed, losing 6 of 7. This all fits in with their general season feeling - good enough that they are not bad, bad enough they are not good. . The Nats cruise with a 32-22 record against teams under .500. This is a record you'd expect from teams around .500. They stall out with a 37-65 record against teams over .500.  This is a record you'd expect from the worst teams in baseball. 

What explains the discrepency? Is their talent level walking that much of a tightrope? Or is it random luck?  Eiether way with KC and PHI to finish the season that doesn't bode well for passing 2023. 

But of course the losses weren't the story of the weekend, it was CJ Abrams' demotion.  He had been struggling but no one is under any misconceptions that that might be the cause. The team didn't even try to suggest it. No, while it wasn't explicitly stated Abrams was punished for being out too late (8AM?) the night before a day game. 

If you are a vet you are given leeway because the idea is you understand what you need and don't need to perform. If you are performing you are given leeway because who really cares what you do if you produce on the field. But Abrams wasn't producing and isn't a vet. He gets the hammer. 

The Nats would have had a hard time suspending Abrams, especially if they didn't have any explicit rules set up which appears to be the case. But demotion seems like a bit much. Sit the guy for a series. 

They are probably thinking "oh it worked for Luis Garcia" and maybe it did but then again maybe Luis was having an off-start to his 2023?  And they sent Luis down to play, to work on things.  Even if it didn't seem like it in the stats, he might have actually done that. Abrams is just getting his nose rubbed in it. More importantly, as any parent or coach can tell you, what works in one case, at one age, in one situation, may not work in another. You have to be careful how you go about things each time and this was not the Nats being careful. 

The Nats play a weird "we're the boss" game at times. That doesn't work for everyone. Victor Robles may be blossoming outside the Nats.  Whether it works for Abrams we're just going to have to see, but directly going to "send him back to AAA" isn't where I'd have gone. That's something to build to and there isn't any indication that that is what happened here. Weaker still was Rizzo making this decision and not offering himself up for questions. Rizzo loves to be the man making the calls, he's lukewarm on being the one to take the heat for them. 

 If the Nats can win a few here there will be something else to talk about but otherwise this may be the going away impression of the season. That would be a shame both because the season was good, and a because it sets up a potential problem for next year for a team that wants to be all sunshine and lollipops going into 2025.

I come here to bury Corbin

Corbin pitched his second to last game in a Nationals uniform yesterday. Like many, many, MANY of those games he lost. He stinks. Get him out of here. 

I don't blame the Nats for Corbin being here in the first place. He probably was the best starting pitcher available that year. The contract was high but they probably had to go high to get him. That's what happens with best available guys. Yes in retrospect it feels like it was probably a year longer than it needed to be but we don't really have the knowledge of what was out there. Some thought he'd be great (not me), some thought he'd be good (me), few thought he'd tank (did anyone? If so, I'd like to see the proof).  It made sense. 

What didn't make sense is continually throwing him out there after it became clear he wasn't the same pitcher anymore. A very good 2019 season devolved into a bad short 2020, then a terrible 2021, and 2022, AND 2023 AAANNNNDDD 2024. In 2021 you could be hoping for a turnaround, in a year you expected to maybe compete. In 2022 you could be hoping to still get value from a long contract. In 2023 and beyond there really wasn't a reason to throw him out there other than to eat innings to protect young arms and the Nats didn't have any young arms to protect. (or a manager that would know how to do this either). He should have been gone going into 2023 let alone 2024. 

Of course I don't blame him for staying. Even with players I don't like I still say stay in the game as long as you can because you aren't getting another chance later. And if you are getting paid like a king to do it? No-brainer.  

For those that want to give Corbin a nod for 2019...  you are free to but note that being on that team doesn't mean he was integral.  Oh he was very good in the regular season. I've admitted that. But the Nats also cleared hosting the Wild Card by 4 games. Was he 4 games better than another pitcher? That's a big jump. 

His playoff record isn't as good as some remember. 

In the NLDS he did well in game 1, wild but avoided the big hit. They lost but it wasn't on him. This is unlike G3 where he came in to help relieve Anibal Sanchez and got immediately pounded into dust basically taking away any chance the Nats had to win. But he finished off his NLDS time trying relief again. This time in G5 and he held the dejected Dodgers down for an inning after Kershaw did his "Kershaw in the playoffs" thing. 

In the NLCS he started G4 and was the only pitcher on the Nats not to dominate the Cardinals. Seriously. His series ERA? 6.75. Next was Doolittle at 2.25. Then no one else gave up an earned run. Of course the Nats opened the game with 7 runs and had a 3-0 series lead so no one cared.

In the World Series he pitched an inning in G1 that was work but did the job. Then he started G4 and lost. He might have been chased in the first if Robinson Chirinos didn't bail him out. It was already 2-0 and he just walked the bases loaded but Chirinos swung at a ball to start then swung again at not his pitch up 2-1. Later Corbin would make it up to him by serving him a meatball for a homer. It was a lousy showing that tied the series back up. Corbin would come back though in G7 in his best performance of the playoffs to pitch well for three innings while the Nats clawed their way back.

Those innings ended up being his lasting impression for a lot of people, but it was really an up and down playoffs though and one that he could have been a goat for his NLDS start or for his WS start.

 He's not the worst pitcher the Nats have had. They've had a lot of bad pitchers. But he's the worst that they sunk more than a couple seasons of starts into. Like of those starters with more than 30 starts he's 7th worst (out of 31) in HR/9, 5th in H/9, 13th in FIP. But looking at those with more than 70 starts he's worst in H/9, 3rd worst in HR/9 (Gray and Fedde if you must know), 3rd worst in FIP. And that's including 2019 which is 200IP of Cy Young vote getting pitching. 

The takeaway from Corbin's career is that Corbin came and threw innings and they won a World Series and he was a small part of that because he was good. Then he stayed and threw more innings and got paid and lost and hurt the team for the next 5 years because he was bad. It's only a fair tradeoff if you think they couldn't have won without him, something unknowable really.

There isn't much more to say I guess. He's been an anchor on the team for 5 seasons. They are better off without him. If you want to tip your cap because he helped the Nats easily take the Wild Card slot or because his variable playoff performance ended with a high at the most important time, that's up to you. My cap is staying on my head.

How are the kids doing #3 - CJ Abrams

Abrams has shown the Nats his promise this year, but also has given fans a dose of the current reality.  Abrams has the talent to be a star, but a lot of players do (see : Green, Elijah) It takes something more than raw talent to make it and Abrams has yet to translate that. 

This year Abrams was one of the better SS in baseball for the first half. A BLISTERING June (.374 / .464 /  .663) helped secure an All-Star bid but since then he's been flat out bad.  And before you say "well he's been hurt" no he hasn't the entire year and how does that explain a May that was worse than any of the recent bad months? No, it just appears that Abrams could be an extreme streak hitter. When he's hot he's as good as anyone. When he's not he's pretty terrible. 

Ok but let's just say that's random luck this year. What if we took the year as a whole, what do we see? In general it's good news. He increased his power. Some of this was hitting balls a little bit harder and a few more in the air. Mostly though it was pulling the ball a lot more. His power is mostly to right center. While doing this did bump up his K-Rate a touch, he also increased his walk rate. With a BABIP almost exactly like last year the read is he's simply a slightly better hitter than last year. Most of the fancy stats agree. 

For those of you wanting stardom that's a bit of a disappointment. There was no big step forward, just a half-step shuffle from slightly below average to slightly above. He's still sporting a .240 average. He still doesn't hit the ball that well. He still relies on the legs to get a couple more singles to pump the average or leg out a few more doubles to help the power. He's still young so more improvement is possible but the rate is slow enough that you'd imagine topping out at 26/27 hitting like .250 / .320 / .460  with 28 homers. Perfectly good bat but not one that's carrying the team. 

Of course again this is "if the year is taken as a whole" if you prefer to look at April and June as the potential then what did he do there? One thing obvious is his LD% is WAY down. He was hitting like 25% in the first half and under 10% in the second half. He's also pumped up his FB% way higher. He's also not pulling the ball as much. If that's a choice he should mostly stop it. Pulling the ball and hitting his fair share of LD is where he found the most success. Of course counter examples are there. He hit line drives in May, pulled the ball in July. And if you look at April and June why aren't you looking at May, July, August and September? If you accept the highs as possible, you have to accept the lows too. That's why I lean more into "take the season as a whole". Less variable. A prediction is possible other than a shoulder shrug

Injuries? That's probably a better thing to hang your hat on than random hot months. If he were healthy he'd likely be hitting better. If he were hitting better the improvement would be more pronounced. If the improvement was more pronounced you could see a way that he improves like this every year to a star level. If he avoids more injuries. 

 We're spending a lot of time on the hitting because the fielding and running are cut and dried. He's a fast runner and if the Nats can help him be more judicious with his base stealing he'd be an extremely positive player on the basepaths. His fielding is very bad this year and even in the "take 3 years to get a feel" he's still a bad fielder. Three years in and the obvious answer is CJ Abrams should not be your shortstop.  Where does he go? There really isn't room in the OF. 3B is probably the answer (he does have a strong arm) though you'd have to re-train Brady House for SS and hope he's good. But it's a question that's not going to go away. You can work on it. You can get better positioned (maybe - they do a pretty good job of it now) but having this as a starting point is really pretty bad. 

Abrams is a player who needs to find his place but the effort should be made. At worst he's likely to be a decent bat without an obvious home. Given the DH issues across the major leagues he could probably land there and be fine. What's wrong with a guy with wheels and a little pop OPS+ing 125 from your DH spot? Nothing.  At best he's an All-Star here and there who is manning... somewhere. 

The good news is 2024 suggests Abrams is playable for the long haul. The bad news it's not at SS and  he's probably more a piece you use to build around someone else than build around him himself. But hey! You need all these types. If you can find a spot where Abrams is like your 4th or 5th best bat you are probably in a really good spot. And if he's a boom/bust player that's fine too. A lot of guys bust who don't have boom potential. You need guys to boom. The fact Abrams could is enough reason to include him in your future plans. 

Monday Quickie - the final run

The Nats are sadly done with the Marlins a team that they dominated this year (11-2) which helped them in their attempt to reach last year's lucky win total with a deserved version of it. Yes, without the Marlins the Nats look more mediocre (55-80) but you can't really do that. Or at least you can't do that and not pull out a team they did really bad against like the Padres (0-6) or Phillies (2-8) or Mets (2-8). The rest of the season is harder, but with 14 games left they should easily get to 70 wins. Beating last year would take going 5-9 also a better than even chance. This is the nice results you can have when you start the first quarter of the season .500. Everyone thank oddly fantastic Trevor Williams.

One thing you might have noticed is that the Nats have a sort of split.  They are one of a series of teams that can beat up the bad teams (WP% .571 or a 92-93 win pace) but get beat up by the good ones (WP% .380 or a 62 win pace) This puts them as a team that if made up like this again will struggle to get to .500 and of course then the playoffs. That's about as far as this analysis goes. They can get better by time. Young players getting better, etc. but why take that chance? Lerners - make the team better!

Everything about the Nats team this year strikes you as "this is what they are" they were a little unlucky in one-run games, but a little lucky in extras. They don't particularly favor RHP or LHP. They are better at home (35-39) than away (32-42). As the season winds down this is the narrative of 2024. Hot start meant they wouldn't be bad, kids came up and they have mostly been good. That was enough to keep them at the a decent pace after the hot start. Now it's about either:

1. setting up the team around these young players, or 
2. doing nothing and seeing what the young players do before committing money 

Nats fans have been patient and have accepted that this go around wasn't going to have the Werth-esque move of bringing in a high cost vet (or two!) in anticipation of getting better. But now you have a ~70 win team with a couple of players that people like to get better (Crews & Wood) a couple young arms introduced this year that also might improve (Parker & Herz) and various other young players that can also take steps forward - with various levels of probability that they do (Gore, Garcia, Abrams, Young, Ruiz, Tena). You could take the time to see if they don't need a lot of free agent help, but that could also put you in a spot next year where you are approaching 80 wins and .500 instead of 85 wins and fighting for a Wild Card. I know where most fans would rather be.

How are the kids doing #2 - Keibert Ruiz

Is "Yikes" an official baseball term? Because that's how I'd answer the question. After a solid rookie cup of coffee and a first year with some promise, the Nats committed long term to Keibert Ruiz as a catcher. In year one his defense seemed to fall off a cliff while his offense didn't really improve. Now he's not hitting, though his defense is not as egregiously bad. What's wrong? 

Well defensively, it's tough to say.  Defensive stats are hard to believe for a single year and require patience to get a real sense of a player's ability. You are constantly going on stats and eyeballs as best you can (see our discussion on Wood last post) but they are best served almost in retrospect, unless you are identifying outliers. Last year Ruiz looked like an outlier in the bad sense. This year he's passable and that agrees more with what we've seen other years. So last year was likely some sort of fluke but it does suggest that he's not a secretly great defensive catcher waiting to get out. He's a mediocre catcher as far as we can tell. Watching him I don't see any reason to disagree. 

Still catcher is a hard position to fill and if you can be average at the plate and averageish behind it, it's probably worth playing you rather than trying to find someone else. But Ruiz has not been average at the plate.

It appears also part of his approach has been trying to swing at more pitches, earlier in the count, and get them up in the air, preferably pulling the ball. In theory this should take advantage of his ability to make contact (still really good at that) but that has only lead to fewer walks, not more hits.  He's putting more balls in play and more in the air but doesn't hit the ball hard enough that that is a good thing. His HR/FB rate has always been low.

If Ruiz was a speedy OF or MI you could tell him to just scrap this and put the ball on the ground, but Ruiz is a slow catcher. Not slow for a catcher, but not speedy in general. That's not a long term solution for him. 

I don't know what is though. Ruiz's best ability is contact. If he wants to put the bat on the ball he will. But as baseball has emerged into the stats age it's become clear that that's not all that great a skill in terms of creating a production. You'd much rather have someone who misses the ball more but when they make contact it's loud contact. There's a balance of course but Ruiz is not there. 

There are two paths forward. First would be to keep trying this : Get it up in the air on both sides, and try to work on his bat speed and power so this matters. This doesn't seem to me to be a particularly promising path given you are working against his nature and he's starting to age into what should be his prime. The other would be to let him be the weak ground ball hitter he is from the right side and let things go as they will.  Neither path is promising but the latter path might let his contact skill get him to be an average bat overall. Maybe you GO for LDs and GBs from the right.  I don't know. The lack of bat speed and foot speed really doesn't leave a good solution. 

I'd say move on but the Nats aren't deep at C. Neither Adams or Millas seem much better and their previous hopeful Lomavita hasn't had a good year.  Maybe the drafted Bazzell will do something. He definitely has an eye.

I don't think there's a good future for Ruiz. He has a lot of PA under his belt and it shows what he is : A generally mediocre catcher and a bat that can make contact but with no pop. Still finding catchers who can even be average can be hard. If the Nats let him be him he can be an annoying hitter at the very bottom of a lineup. A guy you can't K who might turn on one from the left side. Accept the "no better than average" Ruiz for the next few years and get the most value out of him, rather than try to make him something he's not.

How are the kids doing #1 - James Wood

The most exciting prospect in baseball* Wood shot up everyone's charts in the last few years and when you are starting around 15 there isn't that far to go. #1 prospects have greatness expected from them. Is James Wood living up to that? 

My take would be yes. While occasionally there's a rookie that just comes in and steamrolls baseball, most need a little bit of a start first. Wood FEELS like he's having a slow start and yet I say that and he's got a line of .274 / .367 / .413 and is currently the best hitter on the Nats. If that's his starting point stardom is on the horizon. The only question is what kind of stardom.

At the plate the short description on Wood would be : He does strike out a lot (30%) but he walks alot too (12%) and when he makes contact it's so hard it's usually a hit. Assuming these numbers don't get worse, and you usually wouldn't think they would, he's a guy that will hit and walk and be an impressive producer. 

If there is any caveat it's that he is not hitting homers. His 162 game average would be like 14. This isn't so much about bad luck (HR/FB is a little low for his history but like 1 homer low) but that he is hitting a bunch of balls on the ground. His 57% GB rate is the highest he's had at any level. He's also not pulling the ball as much which could be another factor. It's tempting to blame the hitting staff, the Nats are known to focus on all fields as opposed to power, but historically Wood IS a GB hitter. That is his natural swing. Outside of a half-season on AA he's basically hit 45% GBs or higher. 

The Nats could try to change it but in my mind given his success I'd be real hesitant to try to that. To me, sure the upside is he becomes Aaron Judge but the downside is you throw him off his game and he gets worse.  Whereas if you just let him develop and if he doesn't naturally hit more homers he becomes what... Edgar Martinez? You going to complain about that? 

So right now all is lining up at the plate for a seriously fun season next year, with a line starting at .300 / .400 and the question being will it be 15 homers, 25, or 35?

What about off the plate? Hey, remember when I said Edgar Martinez a paragraph ago? The Nats didn't even bother trying him in CF, which some people said he could play, and stuck him over in LF.  Even there with Jacob Young doing some serious Gold Glove work in CF Wood looks... bad. I'll just say it. He doesn't look natural out there.  The last time we had an argument like this was about Soto. I said "no don't play him in the OF" you guys said he's fine and will get better. That didn't happen. It doesn't usually happen. You might get experience but you don't gain instinct. It's hard to get that first step. You get slower as you age. He is sure handed with a good arm so I'm not saying you have to shift him to DH tomorrow, but I think it will happen. 

This defense thing is a bit confusing because how universally praised he was but it goes to show you the major leagues is a different animal. Slightly faster pitches, swings, and hits, mean your instincts have to be at a certain level. You may not be able to see the separation in the minors that comes at the majors. That's true with every skill. He looked like a fringy CF who should excel in the corners. Now he looks like a fringy corner. Maybe time will prove me wrong but Wood probably has a body working against him every year.

The speed on the basepaths has also been underwhelming. His SB rate is not good and his baserunning stats are middle of the road. He does seem fast but it's not translating yet. If there can be AAAA hitters, I suppose there can be AAAA fielders and baserunners too, no?

So James Wood does not look like the Willie Mays / Mickey Mantle one man army savior of the franchise in this extended first year trial. Instead he looks merely to be in line to start a HoF career at the plate. Maybe that means he won't be first ballot. I hope that's ok.

Am I pumping him up too much at the plate? Maybe. Am I letting too much air out otherwise? Maybe. But this is what we've seen. And if you are going with "he's going to get even better at the plate, while improving his defense, and baserunning" understand that's a Pollyanna take. It could happen. He could also start striking out 45% of the time and drop back to AAA. But I don't think either is likely. Hoping that you guys take "Future HoFer" as a good thing rather than focus on "Not Willie Mays"

One win away

From not losing 100. 

First of the modest goals for 2024 specifically. I'd say 

• Don't lose 100 games
• Don't be worst team in league (not guaranteed yet but it would take quite the collapse) 
• Don't be worst team in NL East (also need collapse)
• Win 70 games (should also happen) 
• Win 72 games (that's more than last year. It is also their pace so it could go either way)
• Win 80 games (probably about as likely as being the worst team in league)