Talk amongst yourselves
The Nats are facing a stretch of teams that are probably still trying for something and aren't super lucky looking at a correction... oh wait the Marlins are super lucky. But anyway it'll be a tougher stretch. They'll do worse. The "ooooh look at this team winning close games that must mean they are good now and I can ignore when they were losing all those close games as an aberration probably brought on by... I don't know. Jeimer Candelario playing good 3B and causing them to be complacent" thoughts will go away. It's ok. Let's keep up with the kids
23 comments:
Small correction: "Ooooh look at this team winning close games that must mean they are [better than last year]"
That's what we want.
They're still bad. Most home runs allowed. Least home runs hit. Horrible run differential. Not stand-outs in any categories.
But still, kind of moving up in the bottom-third tier. Not good, not contenders. But scrappy. Hey, sweeping the A's after being no-hit by the Phillies? I'll take that.
"Scrappy" as a theme for this team is probably better than the "Baby Shark" theme. That got tired fast.
Enjoy the family. And if they take two of three from Philly, please do jump on the band wagon (if only a little bit).
I'm just excited about this team given that they're knocking on the door of 70 wins on the season, when we all expected 60-65. And it's not a lucky 5-10 win differential, right now they're only +2 in pythag, and given how screwed they've been by the umps this season, I'd say they're pretty close to net neutral on luck
2024 will be a season where, with some luck, I could see them sneaking into the wild card conversation, but truly this team is looking like it can compete in 2025 with continued development from Ruiz/Abrams/Garcia/House/Crews/Wood/Cavalli/Gray/Gore, and then some proper FA signings (i.e. a front line starter, a real 1B/DH in place of Meneses, potentially a LF).
If you want to get a headstart on those signings, throw your hat in the ring for Ohtani, Conforto, Urias, Hoskins, etc. A bunch of solid looking options that could be the Werth type signing of this window
Keibert and Joey no longer have negative fWAR! Time to celebrate!
(They both have 0.0 fWAR)
(honestly this encapsulates the post-ASB Nats excitement perfectly)
Harvey’s back:
https://www.mlb.com/nationals/news/nationals-injuries-and-roster-moves
No one that I know or have seen online is proclaiming that "ooooh look at this team winning close games that must mean they are good now and I can ignore when they were losing all those close games as an aberration." NO ONE. It's a straw man argument. I know the soulless automaton views all optimism/cheerful thoughts as things to be instantly quashed, but at least give fans credit that being happy about wins doesn't mean that we're under any illusions that the Nats have completed the road back.
But the Nats are showing signs that they are on the road back. It's not sweeping the A's that cheers up fans (some fans are salty that it took two late game comeback to sweep the A's). Watching the team play better (26-22 in their last 48 games, including series wins against the Padres, Mariners, Phillies, Rangers, and Brewers with sweeps of the Giants, Reds, and OK the A's mixed in). The Nats are (h/t to Nattydread) moving up ... in the bottom third of the league. That's the direction that we want them to go, right?
These are the moments when I am happy I chose the user name I did. The latest developments make more more....well....hopeful. It's not just the record, but the way they are playing. Defense seems to have been cleaned up a bit. Stupid decisions seem to be fewer. Players we want to emerge and mature seem to be emerging and maturing. These are positive signs and the more things that aren't trainwrecks make fixing the pieces that are trainwrecks easier.
I should add that while I suppose we should give Davy a little credit for all of this, and the growing confidence and connectedness of the team as constructed, I still feel like we go nowhere great as a team until he is gone. Too many failures and stupid decisions over too long of a period to be our manager once the team is ready to start winning.
Who had Keibert Ruiz batting cleanup on their Bingo card?
Hopeful Fan, I hear you about Dave Martinez. But in my experience, there really isn't a fan base that is NOT salty about their manager. Possibly the Rangers with Bochy. Even Barves fans get snippy about Snitker. Which is why it's easy to call for a fresh start, but virtually every time a team moves on the new manager simply starts piling up failures and decisions that fans perceive as stupid and then the call for a fresh start begins anew.
My rule of thumb is that, at any given time, the 30 dumbest people in the world are the 30 managers of major league teams. The next 30, of course, are the MLB GMs.
@John C. So, where do the owners fit in on your list of the dumbest people in the world?
For all the talk about Lane Thomas, when are we going to start talking about Stone Garrett? Not as much of a base running threat as the Lane Train, but his OPS is now nearly identical, and his defensive metrics seem roughly comparable.
(And don’t get me wrong; I like Lane). But ever since Stone made an initial splash at the beginning of the season, he doesn’t seem to get much attention
@GCX
That's pretty interesting. I definitely haven't been thinking of Stone that way. Through today they both have 116 wRC+s and, while defensive stats are super imprecise, I'm seeing the same rough equivalency that you are.
I think a big part of it is that if you look at their platoon splits, they both are decent vs right handers (Lane has a 93 wRC+ and Stone a 90). But Lane crushes left handers (wRC+ of 165) while Stone's is just 125. (Splits pulled from FG, and don't include today's PAs.) If you rebalance Garrett for Lane's PAs, you get an wRC+ of 100.
So a big part of the story is that Garrett has had much less exposure to his worse platoon side. But he's also pre arb for two more years, and he's not outperforming his batted ball profile the way Lane is, so depending on how you set up your projections, you very well might expect more surplus value from Stone.
I'm definitely going to keep more of an eye on Garrett going forward. Thanks for flagging that.
(A note on defensive stats. FG has Lane's arm as 3 runs worse than average. Look, i know I'm as susceptible to bias as anyone and I know that big showy rocket arms that make highlight reels and get announcers to wax poetic don't always create the most value. But Lane's arm is worse than average? That feels very wrong to me.)
Never thought I’d defend Davey on here, but here I am… defending Davey lol. He deserves a lot of credit for this team’s success. Losing is contagious, as is winning. But it’s really hard to get a group of young players to not worry about the bad games, but keep the them moving in a positive direction over the long haul. It’s a long season. And when you’re picked to be the worst by a mile, it can feel even longer. Whatever his faults are as a tactician are superseded by his strengths and managing a clubhouse. Guys clearly like to play for him. And while we can see him pick a bad time to take a starter out, we can’t see him keep the team together and playing relaxed amidst a losing streak.
Besides, I’d argue that a manager’s gamesmanship is larger removed with all the rule changes (DH, limited mound visits, limited pitching changes, banning the shift, etc.). Their job essentially comes down to picking a lineup and managing a bullpen. And by the way, anyone know of a first-rate manager who manages a bullpen like a wizard? As John C said earlier, in the eyes of the fans, they all suck at that stuff.
Davey should stay. The second he loses the clubhouse, he should be gone because that is all he’s good for. Good thing for him is that it’s 85% of the job.
Only 8 1/2 out of the wild card.
Eh, I agree that most of a manager's job succeeds and fails entirely out of the public view and that in-game tactics we all criticize (sometimes fairly and sometimes unfairly) is 10% or 20% of their overall performance.
But we don't actually know that Davey is good at that other 80% of the job. I think this is the first year under Davey that we're going to (probably) exceed the record we expected on opening day. That said, my mathless guess is that both this season and his underwhelming previous seasons are all within the margins of error. There's just a ton of variance in baseball.
And I agree that it often seems the team is in a good emotional state, but is that because of Davey? I don't know. We've also had a number of key players fail to make the final step in development. Is that partly Davey's fault? I don't know, but it could be.
I'm with you that calling for his ouster is a little silly, but if Rizzo decided to fire him, I wouldn't be the least bit upset. It's just a decision where I recognize I don't have access to the relevant information and therefore don't really have an opinion. No fun for a discussion board, I suppose. Let's go back to arguing about which fringe prospects deserve a shot.
@PotomacFan: the owners are certainly in the lower percentiles of intelligence, but where they really excel is in being evil.
Great discussion about the merits of any (and our) manager. Thanks to the board. Let me share a little more about why I raised it.
First off, I don't think Davy should be fired right now. We don't care about winning and so the fact that he chronically underperforms W/L expectations most years (and in my view got post season lucky the one year won) also doesn't matter right now. What I said was that when we are ready to win, the things that impact winning day to day actually matter and he should be gone. We need a manager then that can flip the handful of games over the 162 game season that make the difference between winning (a wild card or division) and losing.
It seems clear that Davy is a net positive in the club house and team culture. That is much more important at this stage of the team's development. It is important also when we want to win but relatively less so. I understand that second-guessing manager decisions is a fun sport and we think we are all better at tactical management than every manager out there, but there are too many times I have sat in front of my TV and said "DON'T DO THAT" before the bad thing happens and it happens. But that's beside the point. Empirically, the man underperforms P/L expectations almost every season. The sample size is large and growing although I will admit this year might just work in his favor.
I don't know how to assess his influence on player development. As with any group of players, some are improving and some are not. My observation, backed by no data, is that the Nats players tend to regress more than improve. But I could be wrong.
Changing subjects to something more fun - is Keibert Ruiz actually good?
"Dog Days" Joey strikes again!
@Hopeful Fan Looks like Keibert has 0.3 fWAR. His bat has picked back up, so that is good. But the baserunning and the defensive metrics (at least per FG) are still bad, so overall not a good season for him.
Touche. Two out of three from Philly. And smart game managing.
Game Two was lost after Abbott could not step up. So Davey saved the A bullpen for the next day, left Abbott in to die on the hill. In Game Three, the bull pen stepped up, kind of.
Crews to AA: https://www.mlb.com/nationals/news/nationals-promote-dylan-crews-to-double-a
That was quick....
The Nationals are currently 11 games under .500 (57 - 68). The Nationals were last at 11 games under .500 at the end of play on June 7 (25 - 36). So, the Nationals have played .500 for well over 2 months.
The Nationals bottomed out at 20 games under .500 on July 7 (34 - 54) and again on July 19 (38 - 58). That means that since July 19, the Nationals have been 9 games over .500.
That said, I don't see them winning more than 71 games next year, absent some significant free agent signings, which I believe to be highly unlikely.
@PF I find your conclusion puzzling, so asking for an explanaton. Unless things fall apart quickly and disasterously....they should get to 70 wins this year (only 13 needed!). To suggest our ceiling for next year is 71 doesn't make sense.
Except for D Smith and possibly Robles and a reliever or two), everyone playing now is under contract for next year. I expect some minor league players to push for spots...and FA signings will occur, although probably a Trevor Williams type and not an Aaron Nola type.
So, injuries and regression might indeed only take us into the 60's next year, our ceiling must surely be at least 5-10 more wins next year.
Post a Comment