The Nats have been mediocre or worse since COVID (unrelated... OR IS IT) and this year feels different. The young bats are improving to the point you think the line-up can keep the Nats competitive for the season and with some pitching luck... Look we're not talking playoffs here but .500? Or at least best record since 2019?
But before you take a close to .500 record as a sign of things being different let's remember
2025 : June 6th the Nats were 30-33.
2024 : June 23rd the Nats were 38-39
2021 : June 30th the Nats were 40-38
Starting decently does not guarantee anything other than this team isn't going to be an under 60 win historic loser like the 2022 squad.
We're edging closer and closer to real evaluation time in terms of stats, but as these season records show us things can go any which way for entire teams let alone players. Hell the very first Nats season - where they surprisingly had a huge NL East lead around July 4th only to finish .500 - should have told you that. Then again I guess you'd have to be at least in your late 20s to have learned that lesson.
Even if the Nats are closing in on the All-Star Break around .500 there are no promises for a team that doesn't have a history of winning, that's dependent on kids with only a couple seasons of 150+ game rigors under their belt, and an organization with little depth to deal with injuries and a likelihood to want to make some late season trades with an eye to the future.
Enjoy the .500 but don't expect the .500.
14 comments:
I agree that .500 is on drugs. But the Nats' record is pretty close to that predicted by their run differential, which argues that their wins are real: not just luck. 72-75 wins is not too much to hope for, although it may not happen, especially if Abrams & Griffin are traded.
Fangraphs projects their 2026 record at 72-90. That feels about right to me.
Two cheers for .500. It's clear that the Nats would be a contender right now with better pitching. Toboni misjudged the quality and maturity of the lineup. But he wasn't alone. The finish to the 2025 season left a lot of observers dubious. Then, there is the question of whether to give 30-something pitchers expensive multiyear contracts with a lockout looming (putting their "best" year at risk). From the latter's perspective, the Nats were the kind of destination you'd consider only with a premium. Next year, if the hitting continues, pitching may be itching to take the ride. A good team could easily add a billion to the franchise value, meaning the Lerners will have a strong incentive to spend. If they keep CJ, I'd take that as a good sign.
Four reasons that .500 is more realistic in 2026 than the previous examples given. First, the offensive performance of the team is not a complete fluke -- and is likely to continue. Abrams and Wood are complemented by Lile, Garcia, Ruiz, House and the platooned pieces that are saber-metrically utilized. Second, starting pitching isn't as bad as the first few weeks indicated. Mikolas and Littell are reverting to their expectations and the others make up an acceptable 3-4-5. No miracles here. Acceptable. Third, the coaching and player development is obviously better with new regime. Hitters are better prepared and it shows. Finally, there are solid pieces in the minors that can be brought up when/if trades are made. Its not like 2025, when Dylan Cruz was simply brought up and left to wilt at the mercy of MLB pitching. I'm buying into the new plan.
2021 : June 30th the Nats were 40-38. This one stands out...and a reminder that 5 years later--lots of people (not Harper) either don't know or have forgotten the narrative.
We won the World Series in 2019. Because of COVID, we got none of the psychic benefit of being world champions for a year. We were not good in the shortened 2020 season. We started 2021 as an older team with a number of stars and a reasonable expectation of holding our own with the big boys. Actually, we started slow and then Schwarber went on a home run rampage and we are winning a lot. He gets injured, we start losing big time. They trade Scherzer and Turner shortly thereafter. The first day of the rebuild doesn't come until soon after that 40-38 record.
One thing was clear about that 2021 team: it was an "if, then" team in that Plan A was to contend, but it was designed with a clear Plan B if they did not. The 2019 team was an old team ("los viejos"). Even with kids like Turner, Soto, and Robles around they were the 7th oldest team in MLB for position players, 3rd for pitchers. The 2021 roster was pretty obviously constructed so that if they didn't contend it could be easily blown up. There were a lot of players approaching free agency, and pretty much all of them were moved before the deadline.
They've already banked some wins with FG. On Opening Day they projected the team's record at 68-94
The (almost) .500 record has a large element of "smoke and mirrors." But fun to watch -- a lot more fun than last year. And Butera's analytical approach and flexibility seems to be working. (If Davey M. were managing this low-talent team, they'd be well below .500.) But the Nats aren't .500 good, they've had no injuries, and Abrams is hitting at an unsustainable level. The pitching is still shaky, and the fielding is abysmal -- and I don't expect either to get better. And, of course, key pieces could be traded this summer. (For what, though -- more prospects? Come on, let's start signing our better players. Starting with CJ Abrams -- and then move him to 2B.)
I have a legitimate trivia question and am wondering if someone could find the answer. Is this the latest in the season that a team has led the league in rs and ra?
doubt it but I like to look up stuff so let me see
There is probably going to have to be a "not Rockies" caveat here.
A story was published on mlb.com after I posed my question.. the 2008 rangers did it over a full season, with 901 rs and 967 ra
They had both by a wide margin, rs +56, ra +81
And the nats were terrible that year
Post a Comment