I guess old Nats friend Hader signed. But going to the AL really doesn't mean much for the Nats.
Otherwise it remains quiet. For a team trying to wait things out both very quick, which can create a feeling like the last players remaining have to be snapped up NOW, and very slow, which can make your strategy interfere with preparation time by the player, are not good. I'd say we're approaching very slow, but I'd also say that's probably better than very fast. The Nats might have to bite earlier before the best deals are uncovered but they should still be able to use a slow market to keep costs down in general.
If they are going to sign someone.
Last week on Twitter I got into a little back and forth with someone who felt we were being too down on the 2024 Nats. So what if they don't do anything? The game plan was never for 2024 it was for 2025. It was for the young guys up now; Ruiz, Garcia, Abrams, Gray, Gore PLUS the young guys to come who aren't here yet; Wood, Crews, House, Cavalli. We might see them this year but they won't likely be impacting any races.
That's mostly correct and I do, in my cold steel heart, agree. Whatever happens this year we have to wait until we see what the team looks like on Opening Day 2025 before we make any judgments. It doesn't matter how or how fast they get to legitimate Wild Card contention, just that they do. And there was never a case for that in 2024 unless you were really optimistic.
BUT
But there is a case for wanting to see the team show they are going to move when the time is right. That is part of what the Werth signing was. We plan to compete. Without that you can envision a scenario where the kids don't progress as hoped and they scrap 2025 and maybe more. They aren't planning to compete right now so maybe, unlike last time, they are fine not doing that for a while.
And there is also a case for not wanting to watch a miserable team again. The Nats won 71 games last year and were lucky to win that. They are probably a little worse than last year right now. Does anyone want to watch a 65-70 win team again? Does the idea "well there's a good chance they should be better in 2025" make it more palatable? Nats fans have now suffered through 4 lousy years of baseball. One more would match what went on when they got the team, but without the shine of a new team and then a new park. The World Series helps keep it from a riot situation but patience, from what I can tell is wearing thin.
This remains conjecture and speculation until we get to 2025 but I think we'd all rather feel like they are going to try than wonder if they are going to try. Right now Nats fans are in the latter group.
9 comments:
It appears it is not just Nats fans that are wondering what the Nats Organization is going to do: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/lets-poke-the-washington-nationals-with-a-stick-to-see-if-theyre-still-alive/
S
When the Nationals came from Montreal with a completely barren organization, I advocated for them to tank. But there's no reason that should be necessary as a recurring strategy. That was a one-time thing given the extreme situation. Now they're a big boy organization and every season is a chance to make a run. What they're doing now should be condemned as the worst kind of sports team management in the tradition of Bob Nutting, David Glass, Jeffrey Loria, etc.
Yeah it's not Fisher level since he has no intention of selling the A's (at least not until they're established in Vegas), but I do feel like we could see some "sell the team" type chants if the Nats look pathetic this season after doing effectively nothing to improve over the offseason
The recommendation by @Chas R is well worth the time.
It's a melancholic tour d'horizon of the current state of the Nats and best consumed with a glass of absinthe.
The Fangraphs article on the Nats has some valid points, but also makes some outright errors, ignores any information contrary to the narrative, and spins everything else in the worst possible interpretation. My comments are fleshed out on the site (as "JCCfromDC") so I'm not going to cut and paste them in full. The article generally seems more designed to provoke a reaction than to constitute serious analysis. At least Baumann admits this. The title of the article ("poke with a stick") and the preamble (in which he admits that he's essentially writing the article because he can't think of anything else to write about in a slow offseason) track with it being more of a talk radio "have a take and come strong to the mic" approach then a deep analysis.
That said, being a "worst case scenario" take, I know that it's going to be catnip for a corner of Nats fandom.
On Harper's point, I plan to attend a couple of dozen games this summer to see how the kids are doing. I found last year's team to be much more interesting and watchable than the 2022 version, and expect the team to continue to be younger and more athletic. Not necessarily better just yet. But at least working in that direction. Of course I lived through thirty something years of no baseball at all, so I'm still happy to have baseball games to attend. YMMV.
As said here before, I think the biggest question hanging over the Nats is ownership. Will they sell or not? If they still intend to sell, are they trying to keep the player salaries as cheap as they can, or do they plan on spending money when the time is deemed right?
Since 2024 looks to be the year to 'show us what the young talent will be and do'—then I suspect we may not see any moves to potentially block the up and comers.
For SP, we have Gore, Gray, Cavalli, Irvin, and another year of Corbin. That's a full line up, if obv lackluster... unless Gore and Gray take steps forward. Maybe Irvin too, who knows. We'll see what Cavalli looks like after the injury.
We have someone young at every position in the field. Senzel to placehold for House. Maybe we get a rental LF to flip or dfa when one of the young guns is ready, but that might be it.
I understand that the bottom line is the results on the field, but you can't complain about the team tanking for 5 years when they ran the 6th highest payroll in 2020 and the 11th highest in 2021. Even in 2022, on opening day, we were a long shot on and not hopeless.
Yes, since the Soto trade, the team is clearly doing nothing to try and win games immediately, and I don't think there's ever an excuse to do that even when the team is strategically prioritizing future wins -- so I share folks' anger and disappointment.
But it's just so intense to add the Lerners to that Mount Rushmore of the worst owners in the league. I mean, come on. This may be the internet, but it's not actually illegal to have some sense of proportion.
Joey Gallo??? That's a long shot for him to even make it to tradeable at the deadline. It would be nice to get a new owner (or announce you're keeping the Nats) and some...um, sense of direction here.
Yeah of all the names out there... I can't say Mr. Three True Outcomes Gallo is one I was happy to see pop up on my feed, and at $5M at that. Don't see how a career .197(!) hitter is worth that much. I mean, dude hits bombs so it'll be fun to watch those moonshots...in between all the Ks...but I'd rather have Profar or someone manning LF personally
Post a Comment