Has anybody kept track of which pitchers (gone, on the roster, IR) have blown saves? My impression is that many of those pitchers have had some good appearances, as well....that a weak relief staff PLUS needing to use 4+ relievers every night is creating a dynamic where every night someone is going to have their bad night.
A list can be found here https://www.reddit.com/r/mlb/comments/1wa2t30/from_rnats_every_nats_blown_save_of_2026_so_far/#lightbox
If we are trying to be fair the pen has been better lately, but that does mean "maybe the worst bullpen in baseball" to "not the worst but still maybe in the worst 5". The blown saves record almost became inevitable after they blew 6 saves in 7 games in late June.
But Harper haven't you been advocating for the endless nested rebuild scenario? With half as many blown saves we'd be a top team. Coulda added some arms instead of ditching everyone that was performing.
But hey, I hope these prospects turn into high value players we can trade for more prospects during the next layer of rebuild
I still see this season as a success from a long-term perspective. The big questions were answered, like can Wood and Abrams perform for a whole season? (mostly) Is the C situation as dire as it seemed last year? (no) Will Cavalli be good and will any other pitchers step up? (yes and yes but then they traded the one that did) Can Nuñez and Young bring the bats at least to okay? (no; mostly yes) Can any of their subpar starters work in the bullpen? (no times infinity billion)
Now they know where they need reinforcements in the offseason.
A blown save is the most frustrating way to lose, but I get why they did what they did. Evaluating if any of the guys they already had were worth keeping in a season where they weren't expecting to have a lot of leads to protect makes sense. As the first Anon notes, a lot of the time the starters get rocked badly, and nobody has enough good relievers to handle the bullpen needing to go 4-6 innings nearly every game.
Agreed. A #2 starter, a reasonably certain #3-4 starter, and a stopper would go a long way. (I'm not saying that Cavalli is an ace, but he is at least a deuce. A pair of deuces isn't a bad hand in this game, especially if the goal is to get into the playoffs, but not necessarily through the playoffs.) If Seaver King is ready to be a ML SS, you have a respectable team. This would still not be a championship team, but it would have a reasonable chance of hitting the playoffs. We'd still be a proven 1B/DH short, but you can find these guys as reasonably-priced free agents.
There was no excuse for underfunding the team this extremely. And it's not shocking that the most under-resourced bullpen in history is really bad. (I didn't actually look up whether they're the most under-resourced, but they have to be right? It's all pre-arb, aside from Lovelady getting $1M and Perez getting pro-rated $1.9M. And it's not like any of the pre-arb guys are hotshot prospects who just aren't getting paid yet. It's just waiver claims and MiFAs and fringe prospects all the way down.)
But that mistake happened during the offseason, and that's why I'm not actually as bothered by the blown saves record as others seem to be. Like, look, maybe Toboni and the Lerners will learn from that mistake / change their priorities and put together a legitimate team going forward, and maybe they won't. But the bullpen disaster being so stark only puts more pressure on them. It's honestly been my favorite way to lose this season, which is such a change from how it feels in seasons where I have playoff hopes and bullpen collapses are gut wrenching.
I want to win every game but, if we're going to lose, I hope it's blown save.
The blogger and the commenters know 100 times more about baseball than I ever will, and so I don't really know the answer to this: what major, expensive changes to the bullpen were possible during the season?
I think I pretty much agree with Dougherty's take here: It's frustrating, but a lot of the frustration exists because the offense very unexpectedly put the team into a situation where they had leads, and the conscious offseason decision to not construct a bullpen that cost $$ meant that a high percentage of those leads were going to be squandered. Dougherty points out that at least by one measure, ERA, the 'pen is slightly better than last year, but it hasn't helped in the high-leverage situations the team has found itself in. As Dougherty and others here have noted, a problem created by unforeseen expectations could feel qualitatively different than one you knew was coming.
We've been through this, but the problem with being so forgiving is that "team quality" is not a static quantity where a team is definitively "good" or "bad". It's probabilistic and exists on a spectrum.
So the mistake that Toboni and the Lerners made was not failing to correctly predict that the team would hit what we thought of as its 90th percentile outcome. That would be an impossible standard to hold them too.
The mistake was not constructing a roster that could be competitive if they hit that 90th percentile outcome. That should pretty much never happen, and it should absolutely never happen with a payroll that could add $50M and be below average.
But, yes, I agree. The mistake happened during the offseason. Once the season began, not much could be done. That's exactly why Toboni should have handled the offseason differently.
Agree with SMS that we should have seen this coming. Waiver claims, MiFA, and cast off projects for a bullpen is less than “patchwork.” It’s just plain bad. Those mediocre arms are also overused because our manager loves his matchups and refuses to let any starter (including Cavalli until the ASB) go three times through the order. Even on the rare occasion where a starter is cruising through 4 innings and twice through the lineup, he’s making a call to the pen with a start at 60-75 pitches sometimes. If you jump on a broken trampoline one time, you moght be okay. But if you bounce on it repeatedly as hard as you can, well… play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Butera and Mathew’s like that game so to each their own, I guess.
My theory on the lack of investment in the offseason (and why they didn’t go as far as to trade Abrams then or at the trade deadline) is because they’re trying to make this a lean organization so they can sell it. Ted opened the wallet and wanted to win at all costs, often spending outside their means (deferrals). The Lerner children don’t want to pay a fortune for their dead father’s toy any more. They needed to for all the bad contracts to start coming off the books (Corbin, Stras). We thought perhaps now they’ll spend, right? Wrong. We thought maybe if they had a future MVP caliber talent (heck, two of them!) that maybe then they’ll invest in some complimentary pieces, right? Wrong. We thought that once they show signs of life and play competitive baseball, they’ll start to spend right? Wrong.
They are free of the bad contracts, free of the MASN nightmare, free of Rizzo and Davey. They brought Butera and his staff in because they never pay top dollar for a manager (no offense, Blake). Same goes for a GM. It’s a low-budget, cheapness disguised as a “youth movement” to get fans excited for tomorrow while we ignore and tolerate today.
I firmly believe the Lerner’s have no intention of investing in the on-field product. The proof is in the pudding.
The representative from the Nationals' season ticket sales called me today. Bad timing. I wouldn't want to have his job. I'll paraphrase (without the expletives) what I told him: tell management to sign some quality free agent pitchers in the off-season, and call me back then.
Dumpster diving actually does pay off once in a while. But there's a big difference between waiver-wire hitters and waiver-wire pitchers. The hitters flame out (i.e. Weimer) and are quietly DFA'd once the experiment has failed. Nobody remembers. Putting bull pen guys out there exposes sub-MLB talent badly -- and the pitchers get tagged with walks, home runs and blown saves. Everybody remembers.
After a while, it seemed as if Toboni and Butera had an agreement. Put the guys out there in high leverage situations. If he can handle it, he stays. If not, on to the next one. Since they didn't have anyone serious, they just threw guys out there, one after another, hoping that some lefty-righty sabermetric matchup would work out. It didn't. The pitchers were out matched.
When I was a kid on holiday in the Smoky Mountains, we stopped at an old ruby mine where you could buy a pan and a bucket of crushed rock and dirt, Once in a while, a lucky tourist got a ruby or two -- but most of us just got covered in mud. This is akin to the Nats search for relievers.
Unfortunately, this has caused Butera to over-use and ruin the one or two capable arms that they had found. Hate to say it, but half the people in this blog could have done a better job than the new brain trust. Sad thing is, after 230 games, we don't seem to have a better pen than what we started with.
To be fair, the 2026 Nats bullpen actually is in line with previous Nats bullpens--and by some stats (like ERA) is a bit better.
And some of those previous Bad Bullpens (2025, 2019) were not just bad but also expensive and bad.
What makes this year's Bullpen Arson Squad so visible is the Nats hitters led MLB in runs for much of the season. That meant more "blown save" opportunities, including games where the Arson Squad would blow a lead, the bats take it back and then the Arson Squad face plant again. Racking up multiple blown saves in a single game!
While Toboni has brought some good things to the Nationals, he clearly did NOT fix the bullpen. At all. But FWIW it's clear that *TOBONI* knows this as well--the trade deadline deals were clearly focused on providing a much needed influx of near-to-MLB (AA or higher) pitching in general and bullpen arms in particular.
Doesn't mean it will work, and my season ticket group will not renew unless/until we see the team increase spending (we will invest if/when they do). But at least it's modestly encouraging that team leadership has recognized and targeted a serious team weakness, including trying a different approach to the approach that so spectacularly failed.
Correct. They recognized a team weakness and used resources by way of proven MLB talent instead of dollars. Toboni is working with what he is given, same with Butera, same with Mathews, same with Borgschulte. Until ownership gives those guys some money, this team is not ready.
And I heard the rumor that Toboni didn’t spend all the money the Lerner’s gave him. I also Bryce and Soto’s terms being leaked. “Hey we offered a truck load of cash, they just didn’t take it.” Sounds like more Lerner PR to me.
The Nats won last night for just the second time when trailing after 7 innings (they improved to 2-61). I realize you don't win most games where you are trailing after 7 innings, but that number seems absurd (that they used to be 1-61!). The blown saves get a lot of talk and rightly so, but there's also the flip side of the coin that has also contributed heavily to this losing season, and that is unclutch late hitting when behind. The offense seems concentrated in the early to mid innings (or I suppose late innings when already ahead). Seems more like a fluky thing than something structural, but it bears keeping tabs of for next year. If there is such a thing as 'clutch' hitting, how do the Nats improve it?
Something that may contribute is, while it is an alien concept for the Nats, other teams have good relievers pitching in late innings in order to protect a lead. Plus, as Mike notes above, the Nats pen often gives the lead back even after the bats mount a comeback attempt.
This is counter-factual, of course, but I imagine Rizzo might have had more confidence in his lineup than the new guy did. Toboni and the Lerners started out with an all-in, long-slog commitment to player development -- and they traded away Ferrer and Gore to maximize the prospects they could mold. Management obviously had little confidence in Rizzo's squad (perhaps justifiably given the team wide slump at the end of 2025). But their far-sightedness earned Toboni, at best, a gentlemen's C this year. It's hard to see through the haze, but interim GM Mike DeBartolo (a Rizzo hire) broke through with a bang-up job with the 2025 draft. Hopefully, he was just as brilliant in cherry picking other teams' farm systems in this year's trades (although I give Toboni all the credit for Bennett/Perales). The Lerners might have done better by keeping DeBartolo in charge.
The moving of many prospects up to higher levels in the minors this year seems to have coincided with improvements in performance at those higher levels -- suggesting that the Nats' farm ranking will be on the rise. The state of CBA negotiations (the players love the salary floor!) suggests the Lerners will be forced to splurge sooner than later. So, we can hope.
I suppose that it's possible that the Lerners would have been better off by keeping MdB in charge, but I doubt it. Would MdB have been able to assemble the coaching/development staff that Toboni put together? The Nats have made serious jumps in both offense and defense. On defense they went from from #29 in MLB in defensive efficiency, only saved from DFL by the fact that the Rockies play in Coors, to #17. On offense they went from #20 in R/G to #3. And they did that with a lineup that was, by a good distance, the youngest in MLB. Heck, but for a plate appearance by Miles Mikolas they wouldn't have any plate appearance by anyone over 28. That's kinda nuts. Their minor league system not only improved in prospect quality but all of their teams above rookie ball finished .500 or higher. The pitching is the obvious Achilles' Heel and for me holds Toboni down to a solid B, but having such an obvious need should make it easier to address. YMMV
@John C: This is a very young team, meaning just about everybody is maturing. So the question is, have they matured faster than expected under Toboni? Back to counter-factual: Did the hitters mature faster than Rizzo expected? If the answer is, no -- that he did believe his lineup -- then it's at least plausible he would have buttressed pitching for a competitive run in 2026. The Athletics are probably mulling this question as I write.
I'm really not interested in debating any of the literally dozens of possible alternative paths to where the team is now. Particularly ones that seem to be at least partially constructed on the assumption that anything good that happens is despite the new regime (how do you know they happened because of the new folks?), and anything bad that happens is because of the new regime. To me the results are clearly better and the future at least somewhat brighter than this time last year.
Has anybody kept track of which pitchers (gone, on the roster, IR) have blown saves? My impression is that many of those pitchers have had some good appearances, as well....that a weak relief staff PLUS needing to use 4+ relievers every night is creating a dynamic where every night someone is going to have their bad night.
ReplyDeletethere was a list on NatsTalk - https://nats.talkdcsports.com/2026/09/08/a-deep-dive-on-the-37-blown-saves/
DeleteIt's been a big mix because they are also threatening the "most relievers to blow a save on one team in one season" mark
ReplyDeleteA list can be found here
ReplyDeletehttps://www.reddit.com/r/mlb/comments/1wa2t30/from_rnats_every_nats_blown_save_of_2026_so_far/#lightbox
If we are trying to be fair the pen has been better lately, but that does mean "maybe the worst bullpen in baseball" to "not the worst but still maybe in the worst 5". The blown saves record almost became inevitable after they blew 6 saves in 7 games in late June.
But Harper haven't you been advocating for the endless nested rebuild scenario? With half as many blown saves we'd be a top team. Coulda added some arms instead of ditching everyone that was performing.
ReplyDeleteBut hey, I hope these prospects turn into high value players we can trade for more prospects during the next layer of rebuild
I still see this season as a success from a long-term perspective. The big questions were answered, like can Wood and Abrams perform for a whole season? (mostly) Is the C situation as dire as it seemed last year? (no) Will Cavalli be good and will any other pitchers step up? (yes and yes but then they traded the one that did) Can Nuñez and Young bring the bats at least to okay? (no; mostly yes) Can any of their subpar starters work in the bullpen? (no times infinity billion)
ReplyDeleteNow they know where they need reinforcements in the offseason.
A blown save is the most frustrating way to lose, but I get why they did what they did. Evaluating if any of the guys they already had were worth keeping in a season where they weren't expecting to have a lot of leads to protect makes sense. As the first Anon notes, a lot of the time the starters get rocked badly, and nobody has enough good relievers to handle the bullpen needing to go 4-6 innings nearly every game.
Agreed. A #2 starter, a reasonably certain #3-4 starter, and a stopper would go a long way. (I'm not saying that Cavalli is an ace, but he is at least a deuce. A pair of deuces isn't a bad hand in this game, especially if the goal is to get into the playoffs, but not necessarily through the playoffs.)
DeleteIf Seaver King is ready to be a ML SS, you have a respectable team. This would still not be a championship team, but it would have a reasonable chance of hitting the playoffs. We'd still be a proven 1B/DH short, but you can find these guys as reasonably-priced free agents.
There was no excuse for underfunding the team this extremely. And it's not shocking that the most under-resourced bullpen in history is really bad. (I didn't actually look up whether they're the most under-resourced, but they have to be right? It's all pre-arb, aside from Lovelady getting $1M and Perez getting pro-rated $1.9M. And it's not like any of the pre-arb guys are hotshot prospects who just aren't getting paid yet. It's just waiver claims and MiFAs and fringe prospects all the way down.)
ReplyDeleteBut that mistake happened during the offseason, and that's why I'm not actually as bothered by the blown saves record as others seem to be. Like, look, maybe Toboni and the Lerners will learn from that mistake / change their priorities and put together a legitimate team going forward, and maybe they won't. But the bullpen disaster being so stark only puts more pressure on them. It's honestly been my favorite way to lose this season, which is such a change from how it feels in seasons where I have playoff hopes and bullpen collapses are gut wrenching.
I want to win every game but, if we're going to lose, I hope it's blown save.
Totally
DeleteYes but this assumes that the Lerners give a crap. Is there anything to suggest they care about the performance of the team?
Deleteand they're still better than last year
ReplyDeleteThe blogger and the commenters know 100 times more about baseball than I ever will, and so I don't really know the answer to this: what major, expensive changes to the bullpen were possible during the season?
ReplyDeleteI think I pretty much agree with Dougherty's take here: It's frustrating, but a lot of the frustration exists because the offense very unexpectedly put the team into a situation where they had leads, and the conscious offseason decision to not construct a bullpen that cost $$ meant that a high percentage of those leads were going to be squandered. Dougherty points out that at least by one measure, ERA, the 'pen is slightly better than last year, but it hasn't helped in the high-leverage situations the team has found itself in. As Dougherty and others here have noted, a problem created by unforeseen expectations could feel qualitatively different than one you knew was coming.
https://washingtonsun.com/sports/nationals-blown-saves-record
We've been through this, but the problem with being so forgiving is that "team quality" is not a static quantity where a team is definitively "good" or "bad". It's probabilistic and exists on a spectrum.
DeleteSo the mistake that Toboni and the Lerners made was not failing to correctly predict that the team would hit what we thought of as its 90th percentile outcome. That would be an impossible standard to hold them too.
The mistake was not constructing a roster that could be competitive if they hit that 90th percentile outcome. That should pretty much never happen, and it should absolutely never happen with a payroll that could add $50M and be below average.
But, yes, I agree. The mistake happened during the offseason. Once the season began, not much could be done. That's exactly why Toboni should have handled the offseason differently.
Agree with SMS that we should have seen this coming. Waiver claims, MiFA, and cast off projects for a bullpen is less than “patchwork.” It’s just plain bad. Those mediocre arms are also overused because our manager loves his matchups and refuses to let any starter (including Cavalli until the ASB) go three times through the order. Even on the rare occasion where a starter is cruising through 4 innings and twice through the lineup, he’s making a call to the pen with a start at 60-75 pitches sometimes. If you jump on a broken trampoline one time, you moght be okay. But if you bounce on it repeatedly as hard as you can, well… play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Butera and Mathew’s like that game so to each their own, I guess.
ReplyDeleteMy theory on the lack of investment in the offseason (and why they didn’t go as far as to trade Abrams then or at the trade deadline) is because they’re trying to make this a lean organization so they can sell it. Ted opened the wallet and wanted to win at all costs, often spending outside their means (deferrals). The Lerner children don’t want to pay a fortune for their dead father’s toy any more. They needed to for all the bad contracts to start coming off the books (Corbin, Stras). We thought perhaps now they’ll spend, right? Wrong. We thought maybe if they had a future MVP caliber talent (heck, two of them!) that maybe then they’ll invest in some complimentary pieces, right? Wrong. We thought that once they show signs of life and play competitive baseball, they’ll start to spend right? Wrong.
They are free of the bad contracts, free of the MASN nightmare, free of Rizzo and Davey. They brought Butera and his staff in because they never pay top dollar for a manager (no offense, Blake). Same goes for a GM. It’s a low-budget, cheapness disguised as a “youth movement” to get fans excited for tomorrow while we ignore and tolerate today.
I firmly believe the Lerner’s have no intention of investing in the on-field product. The proof is in the pudding.
The representative from the Nationals' season ticket sales called me today. Bad timing. I wouldn't want to have his job. I'll paraphrase (without the expletives) what I told him: tell management to sign some quality free agent pitchers in the off-season, and call me back then.
ReplyDeleteDumpster diving actually does pay off once in a while. But there's a big difference between waiver-wire hitters and waiver-wire pitchers. The hitters flame out (i.e. Weimer) and are quietly DFA'd once the experiment has failed. Nobody remembers. Putting bull pen guys out there exposes sub-MLB talent badly -- and the pitchers get tagged with walks, home runs and blown saves. Everybody remembers.
ReplyDeleteAfter a while, it seemed as if Toboni and Butera had an agreement. Put the guys out there in high leverage situations. If he can handle it, he stays. If not, on to the next one. Since they didn't have anyone serious, they just threw guys out there, one after another, hoping that some lefty-righty sabermetric matchup would work out. It didn't. The pitchers were out matched.
When I was a kid on holiday in the Smoky Mountains, we stopped at an old ruby mine where you could buy a pan and a bucket of crushed rock and dirt, Once in a while, a lucky tourist got a ruby or two -- but most of us just got covered in mud. This is akin to the Nats search for relievers.
Unfortunately, this has caused Butera to over-use and ruin the one or two capable arms that they had found. Hate to say it, but half the people in this blog could have done a better job than the new brain trust. Sad thing is, after 230 games, we don't seem to have a better pen than what we started with.
To be fair, the 2026 Nats bullpen actually is in line with previous Nats bullpens--and by some stats (like ERA) is a bit better.
ReplyDeleteAnd some of those previous Bad Bullpens (2025, 2019) were not just bad but also expensive and bad.
What makes this year's Bullpen Arson Squad so visible is the Nats hitters led MLB in runs for much of the season. That meant more "blown save" opportunities, including games where the Arson Squad would blow a lead, the bats take it back and then the Arson Squad face plant again. Racking up multiple blown saves in a single game!
While Toboni has brought some good things to the Nationals, he clearly did NOT fix the bullpen. At all. But FWIW it's clear that *TOBONI* knows this as well--the trade deadline deals were clearly focused on providing a much needed influx of near-to-MLB (AA or higher) pitching in general and bullpen arms in particular.
Doesn't mean it will work, and my season ticket group will not renew unless/until we see the team increase spending (we will invest if/when they do). But at least it's modestly encouraging that team leadership has recognized and targeted a serious team weakness, including trying a different approach to the approach that so spectacularly failed.
Correct. They recognized a team weakness and used resources by way of proven MLB talent instead of dollars. Toboni is working with what he is given, same with Butera, same with Mathews, same with Borgschulte. Until ownership gives those guys some money, this team is not ready.
DeleteAnd I heard the rumor that Toboni didn’t spend all the money the Lerner’s gave him. I also Bryce and Soto’s terms being leaked. “Hey we offered a truck load of cash, they just didn’t take it.” Sounds like more Lerner PR to me.
The Nats won last night for just the second time when trailing after 7 innings (they improved to 2-61). I realize you don't win most games where you are trailing after 7 innings, but that number seems absurd (that they used to be 1-61!). The blown saves get a lot of talk and rightly so, but there's also the flip side of the coin that has also contributed heavily to this losing season, and that is unclutch late hitting when behind. The offense seems concentrated in the early to mid innings (or I suppose late innings when already ahead). Seems more like a fluky thing than something structural, but it bears keeping tabs of for next year. If there is such a thing as 'clutch' hitting, how do the Nats improve it?
ReplyDeleteSomething that may contribute is, while it is an alien concept for the Nats, other teams have good relievers pitching in late innings in order to protect a lead. Plus, as Mike notes above, the Nats pen often gives the lead back even after the bats mount a comeback attempt.
DeleteThis is counter-factual, of course, but I imagine Rizzo might have had more confidence in his lineup than the new guy did. Toboni and the Lerners started out with an all-in, long-slog commitment to player development -- and they traded away Ferrer and Gore to maximize the prospects they could mold. Management obviously had little confidence in Rizzo's squad (perhaps justifiably given the team wide slump at the end of 2025). But their far-sightedness earned Toboni, at best, a gentlemen's C this year. It's hard to see through the haze, but interim GM Mike DeBartolo (a Rizzo hire) broke through with a bang-up job with the 2025 draft. Hopefully, he was just as brilliant in cherry picking other teams' farm systems in this year's trades (although I give Toboni all the credit for Bennett/Perales). The Lerners might have done better by keeping DeBartolo in charge.
ReplyDeleteThe moving of many prospects up to higher levels in the minors this year seems to have coincided with improvements in performance at those higher levels -- suggesting that the Nats' farm ranking will be on the rise. The state of CBA negotiations (the players love the salary floor!) suggests the Lerners will be forced to splurge sooner than later. So, we can hope.
I suppose that it's possible that the Lerners would have been better off by keeping MdB in charge, but I doubt it. Would MdB have been able to assemble the coaching/development staff that Toboni put together? The Nats have made serious jumps in both offense and defense. On defense they went from from #29 in MLB in defensive efficiency, only saved from DFL by the fact that the Rockies play in Coors, to #17. On offense they went from #20 in R/G to #3. And they did that with a lineup that was, by a good distance, the youngest in MLB. Heck, but for a plate appearance by Miles Mikolas they wouldn't have any plate appearance by anyone over 28. That's kinda nuts. Their minor league system not only improved in prospect quality but all of their teams above rookie ball finished .500 or higher. The pitching is the obvious Achilles' Heel and for me holds Toboni down to a solid B, but having such an obvious need should make it easier to address. YMMV
Delete@John C: This is a very young team, meaning just about everybody is maturing. So the question is, have they matured faster than expected under Toboni? Back to counter-factual: Did the hitters mature faster than Rizzo expected? If the answer is, no -- that he did believe his lineup -- then it's at least plausible he would have buttressed pitching for a competitive run in 2026. The Athletics are probably mulling this question as I write.
DeleteI'm really not interested in debating any of the literally dozens of possible alternative paths to where the team is now. Particularly ones that seem to be at least partially constructed on the assumption that anything good that happens is despite the new regime (how do you know they happened because of the new folks?), and anything bad that happens is because of the new regime. To me the results are clearly better and the future at least somewhat brighter than this time last year.
DeleteHarper, this post is—dare I say—emotional. Are you becoming more than a well-wisher and, in fact, a Nats fan???
ReplyDelete