So that answers that. At least as far as I think. Yes, the Nats have played a relatively easy schedule and yes, they've gotten a bit lucky by the metrics, but I think checking out the first three games of this series, there's no doubt they are the better team. They have what looks like a complete offensive player in Abrams, a young pitcher rounding into form in Gore and a bullpen full of fairly good bets that turned into a solid pen. Add in a few FA and returning surprises and it's a competitive team. Are they really .500 ish? Nah. but let's see how long they can pretend to be because if it gets into June some kids might come up and then they may not need to pretend. Fake it till you make it.
Let's take a look around the league!
NL East
The Braves are good. The Phillies are good. The Mets are ok.
To get into it more - the Braves' offense is deep mixing guys likely to cool down (D'Arnaud) and guys likely to heat up (Acuna) They had SP injury worry but the minor league depth of a few years ago finally is paying off as Bryce Elder has stepped in nicely. In the meantime Reynaldo Lopez has looked very good?
The Phillies are more a hot and cold offense (Castellanos is currently dead) but their pitching as been great. Ranger Suarez got his control under control and the gamble on the injured Spencer Turnball paid off. Caleb Cotham, who came in when Zach Wheeler did seems like an excellent pitching coach.
The Mets pitching, especially the pen has been a strong suit but their hitting is a bunch of below average bats. Neither Alvarez or Baty have become anything yet. Feels like they could get better but they are the Mets so...
NL Central
There isn't a really good team here. The Brewers can hit. The only guys not are their prospects Frelick and Chourio. But their SP and RP are both super shallow. The Cubs basically the same on the mound, but aren't hitting as well. The Reds are more consistent throwers but good or bad at the plate. De La Cruz though is a stud. The Pirates can pitch and might be interesting next year with Skenes if they add some bats. The Cardinals can't hit. Turns out they bet wrong and sent the better OFs (Thomas, O'Neill) away
NL West
The Dodgers finally turned on the jets and have begun separation. They are great they just have to figure out what pieces aren't working anymore (Chris Taylor) and replace those parts with what they have in house which will work. The D-backs should climb out of their hole. They can hit and the pitching is ok. The Padres don't have enough arms. The Giants don't have enough relief pitching. The Rockies don't have enough anything.
AL East
Yankees are holding off the Orioles. Soto is the engine that lineup needed but the young guys are coming through and the pitching all turned around from last years "everyone's worst year" issue. But the Orioles, once they get the pitching in order (it's ok) will be hard to hold off. Have you seen that lineup? 8 players deep with one guy at 30 and everyone younger. Scary. Red Sox are surprising thanks to several "Why is that guy playing like THAT" performances. The Blue Jays are depressing because they aren't old but the young guys at the plate all seem to have regressed already and they were supposed to carry an averageish staff. The Rays are lost at the plate without their rapist of the future, and the pen feels like it's finally run out of young arms to break.
AL Central
The best division or the division that gets to play the White Sox? Hard to tell. Indians line-up is solid and bullpen is great, which cover their minor rotation woes. I have no idea how the Royals are scoring runs but the pitching is mostly good. The Tigers are basically the Royals without the runs scoring luck. If their kids ever hit they could turn a corner. The Twins are America's average team who could use another starter or two (like your average team!). The White Sox are trash but Erick Fedde is good?
AL West
Like the NL Central if it has two Cardinals teams and the White Sox. The Mariners have a fantastic pen and don't really have a rotation hole, but are a bat off. The Rangers are fine at the plate, but need one more reliable starter, or more likely for some sleeping bats like Seager to wake up. The A's stink but have cobbled together a workable staff and the pen is actually good. For the 99th year in a row the Angels have no pitching.* The Astros have caught some bad luck scoring runs but their pitching has absolutely imploded.
*For former Nats prospect Alex Meyer to go from the Nats, who looking back didn't show much skill at developing pitchers, to the Twins, possibly the worst SP developers of the 00s and 10s, to the Angels, who have turned out very few pitchers despite overloading on them, was a pretty cruel turn of fate.
23 comments:
Re: Orioles... have we ever seen a competitive team packed with this much home-grown talent?
15 of the 26 guys on their active roster were drafted or developed in-house (9 of which we drafted in 1st or 2nd round).
Well on one hand - definitely. I mean that's how it always was through the late 70s.
On the "since FA took completely over" (think - post strike) probably so? I bet so, but it would take more work to find out
I am trying to root for the post-Angelos Orioles, like I was happy to most of my life before this. It is turning out to be harder to forgive than I thought. Maybe freedom from MASN would do the trick.
In the meantime, it would soothe my soul to get to .500 tonight. Let's do it, guys.
I’m starting to think the Nats won the Soto trade to the Padres. The jury was out last year. What’s your take?
Always nice when the Nats out-perform Harpers' expectations. After being swept by the Dodgers at home, it's hard to make too much of a 4 game sweep of the pitiful Marlins. However, this is a big change from the last three years. Abrams will be the All Star rep. The no-name newbies are building a "team hustle" reputation. And Senzel is building trade value.
@Donald: Personally, I knew we would win the Soto trade simply on the fact that Preller was the same idiot that gave us Turner and Ross for Souza. I was worried when it was rumored that LAD, STL, and other well
-run franchises were interested too. But when SDP was confirmed, I breathed a big sigh of relief.
But numbers-wise, I suppose WAR would be the proper metric?
Soto WAR with SDP: 7.8
Abrams + Gore WAR with Nats: 7.7
But I don’t believe you can truly evaluate until all the players we got are up contributing (if they get there). And that includes what SDP got from NYY, right? But of course Preller did that deal, so…. :) I’d say things are looking pretty good right now though.
@PBN: If Abrams stays like this, Wood becomes just a regular CF, and Gore remains a solid rotation piece, given that we get them for at least another 4 years (6 for Wood), it's hard to imagine they won't out-WAR Soto. On the other hand, Soto creates a lot of WAR out of one roster spot instead of 3, and when you're trying to contend, you'll need to concentrate a lot of WAR in one guy.
I'm ready to throw in the towel on Rosario. He may have something left in the tank, but there are better options to try. Blankenhorn is 27 and looks like he's having a career year in AAA. Might as well see if some of that translates into the bigs.
Does Meneses have options? I'm not completely ready to give up on him, but if this team is going to be decent, they can't wait around on guys on the wrong side of 30 to come around.
Once Gallo is back, give him another 2 weeks and if his OPS isn't at least 700, move on. The Nats have a slew of guys who can out-do that, especially at 1b/dh.
There are a lot of "might be a major leaguer" guys in AAA that'd I'm eager to give their only/last shot to so they can either be major leaguers or get out of the way for who's behind them. (Blankenhorn, Alu, Baker, Kieboom).
@PBN: the fact that Abrams & Gore alone have partially offset Soto's production since the trade is a very good sign because Soto becomes a free agent after this season. So far since the trade Soto has posted a very impressive 9.1 (and counting) bWAR, ~10.5 fWAR.* Abrams has produced 4.9 bWAR/~3.5 fWAR since the trade (FG does not love CJ's defense). Gore has produced 2.8 bWAR/2.0 fWAR. So by bWAR to date it's Soto 9.1, Nats 6.7 bWAR/Soto 10.5, Nats 5.5 fWAR. BUT ... the Nats have team control over Gore's services through 2027 and Abrams's through 2028. AND the Nats also have the potential of James Wood (currently posting a 147 wRC+ at AAA in his age 21 season) and Robert Hassell III (currently posting a 125 wRC+ in AA in his age 22 season). Jarlin Susana was also part of that trade, but mentally (perhaps unfairly) I consider him the prospect swapped for two months of Josh Bell. Bell kind of tanked after the trade; he put up 3.2 bWAR for the Nats but -0.2 for the Padres.
It's still too early to declare a "win," but early returns are quite positive for the Nats for a trade that the baseball commentariat loved to hate.
*FG doesn't split WAR counts between teams for seasons when a player is moved, so that's kind of a guess.
@Kevin: FWIW Meneses has three options according to FG.
At this point I don't really include Kieboom or Alu in the "might be a major leaguer" category. Kieboom is posting a 109 wRC+ in AAA in his age 26 season, but that's because of a high walk rate and an unsustainable .417 BABIP. Despite his name, Kieboom has shown little power (.056 ISO). Alu is posting a wRC+ of 40 (yikes) in AAA in his age 27 season. Baker is marginal - he's posting a 115 wRC+ in AAA in his age 25 season, but that's built on an unsustainable .397 BABIP, he has very little power, and defensively he's positionally limited. Alu and Baker have largely become superfluous due to the presence of Vargas and emergence of Lipscomb. It's possible that any of them could rebound to the point of getting back on the Nats' radar screen - this year's results are SSS. But they're not showing enough for me to call them up on the "hey, it MIGHT work, right?" theory.
Padres only used a 1.5 yr of service and then swapped Soto for right-handers Michael King, Drew Thorpe, Jhony Brito and Randy Vásquez, plus catcher Kyle Higashioka. You have to throw those into the analysis too. And then there's money. Soto is making $30+ million this year. That offsets some of the value he creates. Will still be a while before we know who won the trade...
@John C - I agree they've been supplanted on the depth charts. But it's time to make room in the pipeline, and in all their cases, I'd like to give them about 50 MLB at-bats before I'm ready to cut them loose. If any of them become viable replacement-level players, they can be flipped, so it's worth it to take a look. I'm not saying they're forcing the issue by playing superbly, I'm saying that this is as good a time as any to get any last pieces of information before pulling the trigger on a move.
Looks everyone. You are almost ALWAYS going to win a trade for a player for 1-2 years for multiple prospects for 5-6-7 years if you go by WAR. The numbers just work in your favor. For example - if Ruiz and Grey can do anything this year they'll "win" the Dodgers trade this year, if not almost certainly next. But does that feel like a win?
Also it's not a win/lose situation. Both teams can win or lose. The Padres lost the trade for the most part. They brought Soto in to drive interest (worked) and to get to a series (failed). The Nats brought in these guys to hopefully reset a winning cycle. That's the question now. If Abrams and all these guys are good but somehow the Nats don't do anything with that, they don't win the trade either.
@John C keep up the good comments!
By the way, you can get partial season WAR data for players. If you are on an individual player’s page, you can click the Gear icon, then choose “Partial Season” and it will split the WAR for a player who played for multiple teams
@GCrackaX: Thanks!
@Harper: for me the "win" in the Soto trade has already happened, because with the trade there is at least hope. The "ride Soto to the end of free agency" scenario has the Nats facing 2025 with no Soto, a comp pick (yay?), and no Gore, Abrams, Wood, Hassell, or Susana. As well as potentially no Dylan Crews, because while I don't see any realistic path for the 2022 Nats to be competitive in 2023-2024, I can easily see where keeping Soto in 2022 costs them the #2 draft pick in 2023.
I don't follow baseball, or a team, solely for the championships. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the championships. But I enjoyed a lot of baseball from 2011-2018 despite the fact that the Nats never got beyond the NLDS in that time frame. They played a lot of excellent baseball (as well as some maddening baseball). YMMV.
@Harper: fair enough on the WAR balance. But where do you define "do anything with that" (if CJ and the gang are good)?
- Do they have to win a WS to "win" the trade in your mind? WS win or it's all a loss?
- Do they have to have another 2012-2019 style window (second most wins in baseball over that stretch) if they don't win a WS to "win" the trade in your mind?
- If they make the playoffs 3-4 times in 2025-2029 but don't win a WS, do you say the Nats "lost" the trade?
Just trying to pin you down on what you think a "win" looks like for the Nats on the Soto trade. For me, if the New Nats (very much including CJ/Gore/Wood and maybe RH3) get them regularly into playoff contention and into the playoffs 3-4 times between 2025 and 2030 I'd say the Nats "won" the Soto trade. Your take?
The ultimate take on the Soto trade is the alternative universe where Soto walks to the highest bidder in 2025 and leaves the Nats nothing but a comp pick. Look at our team chances WITHOUT CJ Abrams, Gore, Wood and (maybe) RH3. Yikes.
Even if one makes the heroic assumption against all evidence (when a player turns down a $440M offer with no referrals, he's telling you he's going to free agency) the Nats sign Soto to an extension for 2025-2034+ the team would still have to assemble a winning team around him. See "LAA with not just Peak Trout but Unicorn Ohtani--never winning a playoff game."
So while the Nats need to have a solid window of success in 2025-2030 to "win" the Soto trade, the bar for being "better off having traded Soto than not traded Soto" is set almost frighteningly low.
I agree that it was right to trade Soto, and I am actually pretty optimistic about all the players we received. Even Hassell and Susana (though maybe he was "for Bell") are showing positive developments this season and I think they have decent chances to contribute.
But I think folks are wrong to entirely discount the joy of watching Soto that we lost. Yes, we weren't contending. But Soto is a special enough player to make even a bad team worth following.
I'm with John C that there's joy in contending even when we fall short, and I even think there's joy in watching good baseball even when we're not good enough to contend. Like this team this year -- I'm having fun watching -- and I'm sure I'd have had a lot of fun watching Soto hit in the counterfactual scenario.
That said, I certainly agree than 2025 would be looking pretty bleak though...
Anon 4:27 Watching Soto on a bad team (us) would not be the pleasure you imagine. Without a strong enough bat in front and behind him, he just would collect even more walks than he does already. Even the best need a halfway decent team to be fun to watch.
I’d much rather watch Abrams, Young and the rest stealing bases like crazy than watch a team full of easy outs interspersed with the occasional Soto blast (or more likely the occasional Soro IBB). Not that I don’t love Soto, but one man can’t decide who wins a ballgame (unless his name is Arnold Rothstein….)
Maybe another way to look at it is if both teams could go back, knowing how things have played out, would they still make the trade? I think the Nats would be an enthusiastic yes. Not sure for the Padres. That might have to wait to see how the players they got from the Yankees pan out.
@Steve Grossman - that reminds me of a quote from Greg Maddux: "in a way, Bonds was the easiest guy in the world to pitch to, because if it mattered at all, you just walked him. I mean, he's just so much better than everyone else on the team -- you gotta get 27 outs, and you're not getting them off of him, so you take your chances with the other 8 guys."
Kevin---I was thinking about Bonds when I wrote it....so I appreciate the quote that confirms it.
Post a Comment