It feels weird having a Spring without the Post or MASN telling us what's up. Having to go by Zuckerman's updates or official MLB news.
Anyway Zack Littell signs with the Nats which is good for the Nats but a bit weird. Well maybe. Littell was a reliever that got coverted to a starter in 2023. He was pretty solid in his half season there and in 2024 and put up a good ERA in 2025. That masked a pretty mediocre pitching effort though. If you were to describe his pitching it would be "I'm going to put a lot of balls in the strike zone. I'm not going to walk anyone and when I do want you to chase you'll do it but I actually don't make you miss on those chases and what you do hit you hit hard" It's a weird combination that relies on the fact most balls put into play are outs and is one of those things when guys can hit him hard enough the whole thing will come apart fast. Like "my last season in the majors I started 7 games and had an ERA of 8.50" fast. But at only 30 you wouldn't think now is when it happens. So why wouldn't a team take a chance on this guy for their rotation. Likely to throw 180 fair innings - that has major league value. I'm a bit confused. Like you'd want to give a promising rookie a shot over this pile of mediocrity but you also just need arms. You always do!
Anyway the contract includes a mutual option which is good because it may make him tradeable if he surprises to start as opposed to Mikolas that's just an old pitcher trying to pitch well enough to get another deal in 2027. It's a good move for this team so I can't complain but it does leave the question of "aren't there too many starters now?" That's fine to me. That's a good question to have, even if it's just "aren't there too many mediocre starters" Like I just said - you always need arms. The rotation will be interesting in how it sets up.
Really I'm kind of worried they let Lord, who surprised last year on a team that should now be looking hard at every stroke of good luck, fall back to the pen or into AAA for seasoning or whatever.
12 comments:
This signing made me think: this one out-Rizzo's Mike Rizzo in the "find a gem in the rough" department. I read earlier that while the Nats don't have a high ceiling for starting pitching but maybe they have a higher floor than we thought. I'm unsure if that's a compliment or a dig. I'll wait and see while I look for the signs of development and coaching to help the young ones reach their potential (looking at you Crews).
Similar to the Mikolas signing, Littell really only helps our median projection in paths where the injury situation gets pretty bad. That's plausible, of course, but I'd say there are much bigger holes on this team than SP depth, so it's a little weird to me that the few FA dollars they've spent have exclusively gone in that direction. Probably the logic is that it is the cheapest way to buy expected return at the trade deadline.
What's kind of wild is that, even if they ship out all 3 rentals and flip Gray at the deadline, by then Herz and maybe Williams will be healthy and you'd still have 6 or 7 SPs before you even look at prospects. I'll be stunned if any of Alvarez, Parker and Lord pick up service years this season. (Irvin would have to be in AAA all year for it to matter.)
I like this move, I thought he made sense for the Nats back in the fall. I think there's just so many question marks with every starting pitcher in the organization that they had to bring in someone who's thrown quality innings recently. I like Lord, but he was a much better reliever last year.
regarding the mutual option - while those rarely get exercised, if it contains a buyout, then it allows you to push guaranteed money into next year. If you flip Littell at the deadline, then it's the acquiring team's problem, or you throw money to them to get a better prospect.
I’d love to see the Nats experiment with a 5.5‑ or 6‑man rotation. Littell and Mikolas could stay on a traditional five‑day schedule, while the rest of the staff shares the extra innings. That setup would protect the young arms, give Griffin a structure he’s already comfortable with from Japan, and potentially boost the trade value of the veterans if they perform well.
It’s encouraging that Toboni and Butera seem open to trying new approaches. The old model has contributed to an epidemic of arm injuries across the league, and finding better ways to keep pitchers healthy is essential if the Nats want sustained success.
I like this move more than I like the roughly equivalent move for Mikolas, but I don't think Littell would have taken it earlier in the spring when there was a chance for a better deal from a different team.
Anyway, the Nats now have three pitchers on one-year deals that they hope are decent enough to flip at the deadline for something. Presumably all three will start the season in the rotation if healthy, otherwise why sign them at all? Which leaves one rotation spot behind them and Cavalli for one of Gray, Lord, Alvarez, Irvin, or Parker. Irvin and Parker are innings-eaters. They're the guys you plug into the rotation in place of Miles Mikolas if you manage to trade Miles Mikolas. (Irvin, especially, who pitched 187 innings in 2024 and 180 in 2025, is pretty much the definition of "innings-eater.") Gray may be injured to start the season. Lord was an acceptable #5-ish starter last year and a genuinely decent reliever; I'd rather see him in the pen. That leaves Alvarez, who was good at the end of last year and has been good in ST, so why not give him a chance to start the year? If he pitches well, great! if not, he gets replaced by Gray. If injuries happen or any of the starters are Poche-and-Sims levels of bad, then Irvin and Parker are ready to fill in. And in a perfect world, after Griffin, Littell, and (we did say this world was perfect) Mikolas are traded, players like Cornelio and Perales are ready to be given a shot in the majors, Herz is back from injury, maybe even Williams is around if someone needs to throw innings.
You can never have too much pitching. When picking one-year contracts, Rizzo tended towards position players. In this rebuild mode, pitchers are given the chance to show value. If any do prove themselves, strong pitchers are always in demand at the trade deadline. Whether or not they do, we have a stable of twenty-somethings who will be fighting to prove themselves for the 4/5 spots as well as several (Gray, Herz) who can fit in later in the season.
I like the Littell signing. If Toboni lives up to his rep, we'll have better arms this year than last, both SP and RP. That plus better fielding could measurably improve team ERA, which might then avoid the demoralization of young, impressionable hitters. Toboni's approach to stocking the bullpen -- picking up and discarding wildly -- reminds me of A.J. Preller, but with a smaller budget.
Whether Lord belongs in the rotation or the pen is an interesting question. I think it's clear that, if the priority was winning games with this roster in 2026, he'd fit best as a reliever. And I also think it's clear that, if the priority was maximizing Lord's expected surplus value over his control years, they'd give him some more runway in the rotation.
The actual team has lots of conflicting priorities, so we'l see.
(Also, just for context, replacement level SPs have an ERA/FIP more than a run worse than replacement level RPs - so I think it's a mistake to look at Lord's splits and think that he's someone who can only succeed out of the pen.)
Not sure they’re equivalent. Littell likely to be paid almost 4x as much as Mikolas.
I don't hate the Littell signing at all. If he can demonstrate himself to be a solid innings eater with an ERA around 4, that'll fetch a decent prospect from a contender needing depth, no doubt.
The Mikolas one, on the other hand, I wasn't a fan of at all and frankly if we're worried about too many cooks in the kitchen, just cut him loose
Who’s up for having some fun? Bold prediction for James Wood in 2026:
HR: < 22
BA: < .225
OPS: <.700
Leads the MLB in strikeouts
Post a Comment