The Nats only make one more deal but as expected it's for Foster Griffin. To Cleveland for four guys pitchers Will Dion, Kendeglys Virguez, and Josh Hartle, and outfielder Nick Mitchell
If you thought the Garcia haul was about quantity this one REALLY is about quantity.
But to be fair that is what Griffin should bring back - next to nothing. He's been good but his ERA is under what the fancy stats say it should be. He's a back end starter for 2 months. This is what you get for that.
Will Dion is a failed starter propsect attempting to become a reliever but at an age (will be 27 at the start of next season) they can't really expect it to stick. He's got pretty good walk and K rates but tends to get rattled once someone reaches base. He's a guy to throw in the bullpen now.
Virguez is the typical "live arm" can be unhittable if he can hit the strikezone, which is usually can't. But he's at a decent age (just turned 22) for trying to fix him.
Josh Hartle is a mediocre prospect starter. He's doing ok in AA but doesn't strikeout enough and walks too many giving him real "this is his ceiling" feelings.
Nick Mitchell is org depth.
The Nats are hoarding pitching depth and you can understand why. They have Susana and Sykora and basically nothing worth talking about. If both those guys don't work out (honestly again with prospects the most likely situation) then they'd be doing repeats of what they did this year if they don't want to spend money for the best FA arms. They need depth of guys that can be slotted in that maybe they aren't as good but aren't a huge step back. Better guys in the rotation, better guys to back them up. This isn't about hitting 8 of 8 or even 4 of 8. It's about hitting 2 of 8. Maybe 3 of 8 if we're talking about getting some decent use in the next 3-4 years. Will they? No one knows! Not even the best prospect guys. That's why you get depth.
9 comments:
I am of the view that quantity is a strategy. It sounds like maybe you agree.
We can argue about whether it is the best strategy for the Nats right now. We can argue whether Toboni and team have a "Moneyball" approach to developing pitching talent (as the Brewers and Guardians have demonstrated is possible). But we shouldn't be arguing about the immediate quality of the return--the strategy assumes a large investment in unheralded young pitchers.
I mean, Soroka got Franklin and Ronny Cruz. Does anyone think that either this is package is as good as that one or that Soroka was a better pitcher?
With Garcia, at least Ortiz and Morales are in the wings, and Cebert might be better than consensus. If I squint, I can come around on that one. Like, there's a plausible analysis that makes it work.
But this trade is just bad.
The Griffin trade was a bad trade. Even from the perspective of the underlying fancy stats, that’s a bad trade. And I think what irks me the most about it - and to a certain degree about the García trade too - is that it feels like the prospect return was watered down by trying to get bullpen arms for now (and mediocre ones at that, maybe with the exception of Cruz in the García trade). Which could have been accomplished in the offseason for a marginal increase in payroll. But it is like they are trying to make up for a previous mistake (too late btw) at the cost of the future (when they would still have other opportunities to address that mistake). The return from Cleveland was so poor it was like giving him away, in which event I would rather just have him pitch out the rest of the season on the off chance that the offense somehow stays hot enough to sneak into the WC. It may only be a 10% probability, but there is probably a lower probability of any of the players received from that trade in becoming useful major leaguers.
I would rather have risked the QO. I suspect the probability adjusted odds of pick 32-40 being an impact player in MLB vs this basket is about even, and it would make this season more fun.
Miguel Sime Jr. is worth talking about:
https://www.mlb.com/video/miguel-sime-jr-s-10-strikeouts
Agreed.
Also, Harper - care to elaborate on your "Wesley didn't outsmart Vizzini" theory? I can see the argument that a wrestling match isn't exactly a contest of strength (though that distinction does feel rather pedantic), but the battle of wits seems very clear to me. What happened in that scene, if Wesley didn't outsmart him?
In Toboni we trust. I guess. He's got a whole team running this.. But keeping the quy and extending a qualifying offer was surely a valid option (??). Can anyone explain why a draft pick from a rejected QO wouldn't have provided better results than a couple of 30-ish ranked players in Cleveland system?
The QO is estimated at $23m. I think there is a good chance Griffin would probably have accepted that. And that’s probably more than the Nats would want to pay him for a one year deal.
Wholeheartedly agree. Sort of reminds me how the Padres threw in Luke Voit as part of the Soto blockbuster as if that was a way to “sweeten the deal”? Thanks but no thanks.
Post a Comment