Cade Cavalli out!

 Story here. 

What does that mean? 

1) It puts a big pause on Cavalli's development.  The best case is he is seen halfway through next year meaning maybe he's a useful starter in 2025. Worst case, of course, is he doesn't come back. 

2) It creates a hole in an already dicey rotation situation where Gray/Gore/Cavalli at the back end was already a questionable tactic, given their performances (Gray), injury history (Gore), and inexperience (Cavalli). It's easy to see someone needing to drop out of the rotation and the replacement would be... well there is no good replacement.  This is already on top of the fact the Nats #1 is Corbin who has been possibly the worst pitcher in baseball the past couple years and #2 is Trevor Williams a guy hoping to stretch himself back into a full-time starter to get some big bucks. 

I don't mind saying "I told you so" but the Nats starting pitching situation was particularly dicey with development having to go better than expected as of today for two guys for it to form a core around the Nats could build something more.  Now it could still happen but the Nats have to go 2 for 2, instead of 2 for 3. 

There are other things that could happen - Gore or Gray could be a #1, both could be #2s, Susana could become one of the best pitching prospects in baseball, a guy in the system or their draft pick could surprise - but these are long shots. 

The Nats season got a little less interesting. One fewer reason to turn in. A knock to the chance at being something sooner rather than later (or never). Crafting a good team from scratch is hard. After catching some luck the first time around that made it go as smooth as it could reasonably go, Nats fans are learning this the hard way.

Joey Meneses - superstar, star, solid starter, or sssssfluke?

 My... cautiousness with Joey Meneses should be apparent by now.  He absolutely crushed to end the year last year but it was only 56 games, he's 31 years old, and everything before suggests his homer rate was a fluke. And it was his homer rate that was turning a guy that might hang around into something special. Not that Joey can't be good. I think after the season I pegged .280 with 25 homers as definitely possible, even though that was more power than he showed up until last years major league trial. You have to give more weight to the recent data. But a star?

However Joey is still hitting in the WBC.  While Spring Training is Spring Training and everything there can be ignored, does the WBC, where guys are actually trying, mean something? 

My initial thoughts is probably not. While the effort is there the talent spread is huge. Also it's like barely any games. Last year there really wasn't a true one so we have to go back to 2017 to see if there was any connection. I picked out some names of guys that looked to do really well :

Wladimir Balentien (NED) : .615 4 homers

John Andreoli (ITA) : .316 3 homers

Carlos Correa (PR) : .333 3 homers 

Alfredo Despaigne (CUBA) : .474 3 homers

Jurickson Profar (NED) : .464 5 doubles and a homer

Seiji Kobayashi (JPN) : .450

Yurisbel Gracial (CUB)  : 435 4 doubles and a homer

Hayato Sakamoto (JPN) : .417 

How'd they do in 2017?

Wladimir Balentien (NED) : Under contract in Japan, Balentien 32 aged and hit slightly worse than the previous year (about .250 with 30 homers)

John Andreoli (ITA) : 27yo Cubs farm hand he did have a mild power bump in 2017 but at the cost of some average and patience.

Carlos Correa (PR) :At 22 blossomed into a true star - possibly best year ever

Alfredo Despaigne (CUBA) : Same as Balentein except he was 31

Jurickson Profar (NED) : tepid start and got hurt - barely played his 24 yo season

Seiji Kobayashi (JPN) : Middling 28 yo Japanese league catcher hit the same as the year before

Yurisbel Gracial (CUB)  :  31 year old was locked in and had a great year in the Cuban league and Canada.  Wasn't as good in 2016 but was in 2015. 

Hayato Sakamoto (JPN) :28 year old came back to Earth after a break out 2016.  But would bounce back to be great in 2018 

So a bunch of mixed results. For Nats fans I'd say... it's good Joey is hitting because he is such an unknown that any time you can see him hit and confirm what you saw had some level of reality to it, the better. There might be something to his power surge being real which bodes well both for my take and those that like him better. The lack of power shown in the minors might be a thing of the past. While we'll have to see what happens when pitched around (he's not patient) it's just another piece of evidence he should be good this year and maybe great.

Ruiz - Face of the Nats

 Keibert Ruiz signed a contract extension with the Nats.  It's 8/50 with two club options.  It pays his well over what he would be paid for the next two years (when he is pre-arb and basically paid a major league pittance) over what we would be paid for the three years after that (when he is arb... he'd probably make less the first year, more the last it's a little bump) and under what he would get in those last three years.  It's a little front loaded with 25 mill coming in the arb years meaning something less than that will come in the three FA years. But it's probably like 22 million.  I assume he's not getting paid that much more the next couple years and I wouldn't be surprised if the options were for pretty big money. 

Is it worth it? Definitely.  Keibert is already a league average type catcher with solid defense and high contact offense. If he can either find patience or develop power he can make himself into an average bat and very valuable.  That's because catchers stink, or at least the current catcher situation in MLB.  Keibert isn't necessarily a plus player in general. His offense is below average and his D doesn't make up for that. But he IS almost a plus player for a catcher. And being that at 24 in his second full year means there's a good chance he can improve making this deal a steal. 

FWIW - If you've read this blog I've been high on Ruiz.  I think he can develop top notch D skill and while I think patience will never come, if he can up that power just a tick you've got a guy who may be All-Star caliber at the low bar of catcher for a fill-in price. 

Smart move. Love it. Do Garcia next. 

There was a second round of cuts today Names might be a bit more familiar. 

Jake Irvin - nothing special. AAA starter 

Jordan Weems - all the stuff but past the age you think he could develop.

Cory Abbott - another AAA starter. Guys like him and Irvin shouldn't see the majors for a good team outside the rare emergency start

Matt Cronin - A lot of talk about him this spring as the Nats don't have lefties in the pen and he might be one. I guess not.  We'll likely see him again either because he's forced the issue or because the major league team just needs that arm.

Jackson Rutledge - high draft pick who has been hurt and struggled but shows some interesting flashes. Worth giving a year or two in AA to see what happens

Drew Millas - someone must love this kid because I don't see it.  At 24 this year Ruiz is signing a decade long deal. At 25 this year Millas is hoping to break .225 in AA. 

You know these things do kind of fit together. A reason the Nats might have signed Ruiz long term is that their organization is a wasteland of catching. Israel Pineda might be ok. After him though there is nothing close to looking capable of playing in the major leagues.  These odd looks at Millas and Brady Lindsly might have been confirming that dearth of talent before this deal.

 

On the talent - 

I don't think I'm being pessimistic. Most guys end up as nothing. If all top minor league talent became good major leaguers we'd be flooded with great players. The Nats system probably peaked between 2011 and 2012. Getting up near the #1 ranking,  this was their Top 10 

1. Bryce - star
2. Rendon - star
3. Goodwin - part time major leaguer for a while
4. Alex Meyer - never could stay healthy, 19 ML starts
   
5. Matt Purke- briefest coffee cup
   
6. Sammy Solis - unimpressive reliever
7. Lombo - folk hero but replacement ballplayer
8. Destin Hood - slightly less brief coffee cup
   
9. Chris Marrero - pretty bad 150 ML PAs
   
10. MAT - defensive CF specialist
    

This is not unusual. This is typical.  And in fact the fact all 10 of these guys made the majors is a testament to how good it was.  But there isn't a major league core here, and to think you can get it from one minor league class is wishing for a lot more than most teams ever get. And that's with arguably the BEST minor league system which the Nats don't have. A core is built over time over several minor league classes and smart trades and good FA signings. 

The idea that the Nats offense will turn into something good AND the starters will all be 2-3 types so they can pop in a couple FA signings and be competitive in 2025... that's a bridge too far and I hope I can get you to see that. Hope for that core offense C-2B-SS-CF to look ok at the end of this year so it can be built on. Hope for one of the starters to look like a 2-3-4 so it can be built on. But understand building will be needed. Without massive luck this isn't a team that's going to compete in 2024, and likely not seriously in 2025 either. And without spending a good deal more that's where it will end.  The first steps are now, let's hope for forward movement so the next steps can come.

Guaging your feelings

The Nats have arguably the best farm system they've had in a long while. It is top heavy, almost entirely powered by the recent trade of Soto, but past top Nats systems were even more so. The talent level is deeper (although that means maybe 10 guys you like instead of 6) and that top talent level is a good bet for major league impact. Maybe small impact but teams are built on combinations of talent. 

There's a little Twitter argument spurred on by that fact and this article. Some believe the Nats are in good shape. Others do not. 

I lie with the latter. I think the Nats offensively have a decent shot of having a contending offense in a few years. They should have major league usable 2B (Garcia), SS (Abrams), C (Ruiz) and probably two OF (Hassell and one of Wood/Green) Maybe someone else (House?) A couple of these will be better than usable, if the Nats are lucky All-Star caliber, but the big thing is that they are here and cheap. If they are merely average you can spend and get an All-Star 1B bat and an All-Star corner OF bat and suddenly that's a major league lineup. 

But pitching wise... I don't know where the success is coming. They have Gore and Cavalli and Grey all starting out this year but I don't think any evaluator is high on any of them being a rotation ace. It's likely 1 or 2 stick around in the rotation as 3-4-5s but getting an ace pitcher is expensive and competitive. I don't see where the competitive starting staff is coming from.

So where as the offensive group has a base there that may make rebuilding a line-up easy or may make it hard but will make it possible, that can't be said for the staff. They NEED Gore, Cavalli and Grey, guys I'm not sure I'd say anyone will definitely be above an in and out 5, to give them two guys at least a 3 or better. I don't see how I can say that looking at their talent, what they've done, their injury history and knowing what I know of pitchers. 

There is a path to success. It's the offense stays on the expected track and the owners, whoever they may be, spend a TON to get a lot of starting pitching and a couple bats. I guess that's better than where they were, but I'm just guessing. More to the point it's better where they might have been - no Soto and no these guys but that would have been their own fault. Just like it's their own fault they are here. 

Anyway what do you think? Do you think there's a real shot of the Nats being more than a .500 maybe get a WC nuisance in say 2025/6 ? Do you think there's a good chance of them being competitive to the point of people saying they could win a series?

First "Cuts"

 Here you go. 

nothing unexpected or even interesting but we'll try 

Joan Adon - you remember he stunk last year. Which isn't a surprise because he's never really been good. BUT he's young and he didn't get his brains beaten in in AAA and the Nats have no pitching depth so to AAA he goes to be next in line. 

Alberto Baldonado - an ok AAA reliever but old. Should be org filler in AAA

Gerardo Carrillo - not exactly sure why he was in camp as he still hasn't figured out AA and he's not old that you feel you have to move on him.  Hopefully they'll transition him to reliever this year

Evan Lee - see Baldanado but not old, better.  More likely to be a guy that shuffles up and down who might stick as one of the last guys in a major league pen.

Francisco Perez - typical big arm reliever who can strike out the side but is more likely to walk in a run. But that's kind of guy you want in the minors. Have a half-dozen of them and one should hit.

Tommy Romero - another type that you want in the minors in that he looked pretty good until last year when the Rays said "this stuff will never play".  The Rays are a smart org, but no one is right all the time.

Brady Lindsly - had to look this guy up. I'm not entirely sure if this wasn't a start of a "should we keep this guy or not"

Lucius Fox - old Wallace and Vomit himself. Org filler for an org where org filler might play in the majors here and there.

Erick Mejia - a versatile piece for your AAA team. Nothing more.

Yasel Antuna - One of the longest tenured Nats (signed in 2016) he was SO young that he almost had to be a prospect by age alone, like if you stuck a 14yo in rookie league. Even if he hit .180 with no XBH you are like "well he didn't hit .000" Anyway. He showed signs of life last year after basically being dead in the water since 2018. He's still only 23 so this was probably another long look at what they actually have before he goes down to AA. 

Donovan Casey - Casey CRUSHED as a too old for rookie ball player and did well for a too old for High A player. But outside of 12 AA games that's all that looks good over an 8 year minor league career. He has always struck out too much. Last year the power went and I think it's time to cut ties. There's nothing usable here

Defense Defense Defense

 It was hard to see last year because the Nats couldn't hit and couldn't pitch, but they also couldn't field*  Defensive stats are notoriously unreliable but when Defensive Efficiency (25th), and Fangraph's defensive WAR (29th) and just plain errors committed (29th) are all telling the same story, you can be pretty sure the story is true. While we don't forsee big improvements in pitching or hitting, could defense be the exception? 

Catcher - Ruiz/Adams : Catcher is tough because of it's different demands but turns out what we see stats wise matches up well with the eyeballs, at least for me. Ruiz actaully ranks as a pretty decent catcher and Adams is straight trash.  Pretty simple then - if anyone beats out Adams backing up Ruiz it'll be an improvement.

First - Bell/Meneses/Voit : Bell isn't good and Voit and Meneses looked really bad. Dom Smith hasn't played full-time first ever in the majors and has looked all over the place. He'll probably be better than Bell but I won't guarantee it. 

Second - Hernandez/Garcia : Hernandez played a middling 2B while in his brief stint Garcia looked better than that. Kind of the same as 1B where it'll probably improve but no guarantees.  Still this move is important because... 

Shortstop - Garcia/Escobar/Abrams : Garcia is NOT a SS and was bad. Getting him out of there is an improvement almost regardless of who comes in. Abrams, if he can keep the errors down might turn a big negative into a minor plus at an important position. That would be a big deal. But even getting to slightly below average would be a big improvement. Vargas is a competent back-up no worse than the aging Escobar

Third Base - Franco/Vargas : Franco was not the worst and Varags was actually pretty good. Candelario probably matches up with Franco so things probably stay neutral here which is ok because the Nats 3rd base defense was fine. 

Center Field - Robles/Thomas : Robles is good and is probably the best fielder at any position the Nats have currently. Thomas merely can hang. Given Thomas is the likely replacement for Robles, this comes down to playing time. The more Thomas plays in CF over Robles compared to last year the worse the fielding here will get. A small plus will go away. 

Right Field - Soto/Thomas/Meneses : As we talked about yesterday (and I've talked about for years) Soto is not good. He is bad (in the field)!Thomas is ok compared to a lot of guys stuck in a corner. Assuming he gets most of his time here and not in CF the OF will be better. 

Left Field -  Yadi/Thomas/Call : Yadi is not good. Lane is we talked about this before. Call is actually decent. All these guys are back but it's Dickerson that will likely log the most innings out there and he's probably around what Thomas is. But if age gets him it could get bad. Still you'd lean toward slight improvement. 

So it's an interesting situation. The Nats should be better with Garcia off SS and getting more time at 2B, and Smith at 1B and Soto and Yadi out in favor of Dickerson and more time for Robles/Thomas. It doesn't mean they will be very good, they are coming up from terrible, but they should be at least passable. And I think they could be very good.  Ruiz and Abrams feel like they have that level of talent. Robles we know he does. Though one or two may shake out to be, there isn't necessarily a weak spot to start the year in the starting nine. The worst likely possibility is just that Adams backs up Ruiz. 

But there is also some potential to remain bad. Abrams does need to learn to keep the errors down, he should eventually but maybe he doesn't this year. And maybe the Nats get tired of Robles not hitting and barely play him shifting the kind of out of position Thomas to CF who will be unable to help out a meh Dickerson. If the next guy up is Yadi or another bat first guy the OF D could go from pretty good to pretty bad in a heartbeat. Really Abrams is sort of the key. Garcia was so bad at SS that as long as Abrams is ok, the defense will overall almost have to be better.

It's up to the Nats. Being the worst means there's room for easy improvement and it seems like they have made changes that will show that. But if they start fiddling with it for other reasons... well they better be right about those other reasons.

 

*What exactly is Davey doing? No one knows other than riding off the luck of being here when the team won a series around him.

If James Wood, Wood you?

The Nats are looking to go into the flood again with a young player, except this time it's James Wood instead of Juan Soto.  James Wood is being pushed as much as the Nats can push someone who won't start in the majors. He played a little bit in yesterday's game against the Yankees and was basically all the official Nats tweets for the day. Why are they doing this? 

Well first - James Wood becoming a superstar would help sell the trade of Juan Soto.  Juan had an off-year last year and was still somewhere in the 7-14 best range for all major league hitters. Think about that. He'll be 24 all season and the only player younger than him in the Top 15 is Julio Rodriguez. Juan Soto is really that good. Trading him was really that bad. His off time in San Diego helped hide that a little but if, or more likely when, he goes off it'll set off another round of recriminations at the Nats management. Unless they have a new Juan Soto. Gore, Adams, and Hassell are all good prospects but the lights have dimmed on them enough that if they are very good this year or a superstar next year it would be a surprise. James Wood though, carries the variability of youth. He could struggle a bit in AA this year or he could be a surprise ROY candidate. You don't know.  If he is the latter then trading Soto is a it more palatable, a bit of an easier sell. Hell they might even force Wood to play CF (a position I think he best "hangs" at than where he should end up*) to show up the difference between him and likely sooner than later DH Soto. 

Also Wood presents the best excitement chance for this team in a season with little to sell.  Like I said Gore, Abrams, and Hassell later in the year are all probably multiple year major leaguers. But they are also probably just ok guys. Luis Garcia might get better but he doesn't look like a star. Neither does Ruiz** or Gray. Meneses? Maybe but it's also quiet possible he bombs right off the team. No Wood is the best bet for a superstar turn and one that when it happens will stick. The sooner it happens, IF it does, the sooner the Nats can sell it. 

But mostly they want to push him because they need him to be the next Soto. They need a cheap superstar to build around. They need a cheap superstar to market the team for a sale. Can he be the next Soto? It's WAY off to say yes or no.  All we can do is compare where they are at the same age. 

Wood is about 20 1/2 when the season starts turning 21 a few weeks before this season ends. He rocked rookie ball at 18+ (.372 / .465 / .535) and easily handled regular A at 19+ (.324 / .429 / .560).  He should be in High A to start the year but if he were in AA it would surprise no one. 

Soto at 20 1/2 was a month or so into his 2019 season and is the same age all season long (birthday late October). He rocked rookie ball at 17 (.361 / .410 / .550), regular A at 18 (.361 / .427 / .523), and was doing so well in a quick rise through regular, high and double A at 19 (.362 / .462 / .757!!) that the Nats could not keep him down.  He played most of his age 19 season in the majors hitting .292 / .406 / .517 barely losing out in ROY to Acuna***.  At 20 1/2 he was starting to turn around from a "slow for him" start and show he was really the star he looked like in 2018 by having an incredible if a tiny bit injured May (.380 / .451 / .676)

The takeaway should be clear. Wood is not Soto. Where as Wood is hoping to do well in AA to suggest a promotion to the majors ASAP, Soto was already a star at the top level helping his team win a series. 

But Wood doesn't have to be Soto. Soto very likely is first-ballot HoF material. Wood just has to be a regular old star. And for that he still has a chance and the Nats have a chance to look ok to their fans. At least a little bit. Maybe.  Wouldn't hurt to get some pitching. 

*I know some of you will want to question me but remember when I said years ago "Soto stinks in the field" and you guys were all "No he just needs experience"." Oh he's getting better".  "He's so athletic - he'll get it." And then I was proven right and you guys wrong?  Good times. 

Remember those good times. 

** I still think Ruiz has quiet star potential where 7 years from now you realize he was like one of the best 5 catchers in like 4 of those seasons and Top 10 the rest and you didn't quite appreciate that. He needs to develop a tick more offensively though. 

***Who did deserve it. It might end up being the best season of his career. He's hurt a bunch and he wavers a little. But combining offense and defense he was better than Soto. 

It's go time

The fanfare is non-existent. The excitement is limited. But it's baseball dammit and YOUR Washington Nationals are playing Spring Ball.  

First things first - don't pay attention to Spring Training stats. Especially in this new rule era. Just don't.  As usual we'll go over a few numbers like 

• Dee Strange Gordon Spring 22 : .455 with 4 doubles! 
• Josh Bell : .147 / .216 / .265 
• Patrick Corbin : 0.00 ERA  2BB 10 K 
• ummm well no Nats pitcher was really good last year so showing them bad in ST doesn't do anything but I hope you get the point. AGAIN

Spring Training baseball does little for me.  I like to watch an inning or two because "oh, baseball! Yes come back" but not much more than that. GOING to Spring Training? That's great. Watching ST from afar. Meh. I have said I think baseball could do something with it to make that first ST game something.  A rematch of the WS teams or the teams that lost in the CS. Always Marlins/Rays. You know, something. But the Arizona/Florida split hurts the former plans and the latter plans are... well it would take time to build that up, like seeing the Lions on Thanksgiving. 

The Nats haven't put all their good players on the same team yet, splitting the squads and front loading the line-ups so the starters get more ABs. Ruiz, Smith, Garcia, Adams, Candelario, Thomas, Robles, Dickerson, Meneses.  No surprises. 

What am I looking for this spring? I guess mildly interested in who is pitching where in the pen (won't really figure in until later - now everyone is getting an inning and better guys first because the end of games is for scrubs), if the 5th starter will really be Cavalli (Gore, Corbin, Gray, Williams being set), who makes the bench. 

But it is baseball and it is back and right now there is a reason to follow, so we will.

5, 10, 15 no 20

The Nats are starting Spring Training finally. There isn't much news. Strasburg isn't ready - but no one thought he would be.  Outside of that... no Jackson Tetreault? Is that news?  No that isn't news.  Here's the NRIs, 

How does this compare to past Spring Trainings?  Well Barry covered that. You should read that! 

For more of a depth I go into the archives and see what I was talking about in Februarys past

5 years ago - 2018 

I said they should trade Soto for Realmuto. Oops! The Nats needed a catcher and it would be in 2018 where Soto went a 100 MPH from "Hmmm this guy might be something" to "Look out! There's a star-a-coming".  It's still the right bet to make in general.  Four out of 5 times it'll be the right move. But you don't care if "over time across all teams" the move makes sense do you?  Sports isn't macro, it's micro. Soto was the 1 in 5.  

The Nats needed a SP and C and it was obvious. But they didn't deal anyone for Realmuto (Marlins wanted Robles) Instead the Nats signed Miguel Montero. Surely Weiters will turn things around! Waa waaa. At SP I said neither Cole nor Fedde would make it but might as well try out Fedde and get that over with. Didn't know they'd "try out Fedde" for a half-decade. Hellickson would do a decent job but when Strasburg got hurt (SHOCKING) that meant more holes and young Ross, Fedde, and Jefry Rodriguez didn't work and it remained a hole. So the problems we all knew would be problems were problems. Really a failure year by Rizzo where if Soto didn't come up and become SOTO the team might have been under .500.

We actually argued about the OF. I worried Eaton/Robles/MAT/maybe Howie wouldn't work. You guys were more confident. It was kind of a push. MAT wasn't good enough but the rest were. However Eaton, Howie, and Robles all got hurt and Eaton and Howie getting hurt was certainly a concern because of history and age respectively. But this whole thing was rendered moot by SOTO. 

I didn't like the signing of Joaquin Benoit. He became a "mystery National" in that he got hurt in Spring Training and never appeared in a game in the majors or minors. Basically never heard from him again. 

And proving everything new is old, we talked about possible rule changes. 

10 years ago - 2013

The talk was about Bryce. I said don't worry, if you were worried, he'd break out by 2015.  He almost did in 2013 but injuries kept hobbling him until his 2015 MVP season.  I also noted don't worry Strasburg is great. You may have forgotten this as well but until the mold game in 2017 there was real split feelings on Strasburg. Don't make me go back into those comments to prove it!  Guys liked ZNN better - mainly bc he was a surprise doing better than expected whereas Stras was a disappointment doing worse than expected. Even though that really mean ZNN was an A- arm and Stras wasn't winning Cy Youngs.

There was some worry about Gio Gonzalez being linked to that PED-pushing trainer. Remember that? Biogenesis. Never could make anything stick for him unlike the 12 other guys so he was probably clear.

I noted the Nats had crazy pitcher health in 2012 and how impt that was and also how I didn't think they'd do it through 2014. The health held over through 2013 though Haren disappointed (for real not like the Strasburg one) and everyone was a little worse and almost 2014. Both Gio and Fister would get to 25 starts but not 30. 

I said don't worry about Espinosa (OOPS! - hey he was hurt) maybe worry about the pen not having depth - which was true but the back end basically stayed healthy making it moot.  The Danny thing came because everyone wanted Rendon up.  I said we should be patient and in 2013 Rendon was... fine.  He hung in there and proved he was ready for 2014.

15 years ago - 2008 

Nothing. Well actually I was over on something called MVN typing up stuff for no money because I didn't really care. Still don't! But that attempt at a conglomerated site went down like so many others. Shockingly despite intrusive and annoying ads. And I stayed here full time ever since. And blogs have taken off and I'm now a millionaire through... I don't know. Views? Just general payment through the air?

New Rules

Baseball has been trying to solve a problem over the past decade or so. The game has gotten... well boring. In the polls and focus groups and just general feeling the fandom is getting older because the game isn't appealing to younger fans.  

Now a fair accounting will note things like fandom is basically going down across the board in all sports and the few that are gaining fans aren't gaining at the rates that will make them a "national-level" sport, they are simply new and thus have easy room to get bigger. But when HUGE money is on the line, like the re-sale value of these franchises, "fair accounting" doesn't matter. You gotta force the game to grow and get young or else. 

Fans, who aren't actually really thought of in these rules after "gotta make it more entertaining", like to argue which rules are good and which are bad. They'll do it completely secure in the knowledge that they are arguing from a place of objectivity while those that argue against what they are saying just don't see what they see and are wrong. It's fun! (It sort of is! Bar arguments are fun) 

But if we do try to be objective - not judging if a rule is good or bad - but effective or not, can we come away with some truths, however small?  Let's try 

 

RULE CHANGE 1 : Shift limitations - Basically IFers have to be in certain spots until pitch is thrown

The micro problem : Shifting has done a number on non-homer hits, especially singles for dead pull hitters

The macro problem : Too many homers, walks and K makes baseball boring

Will it work?

Micro : Yeah at least a little. Even if fielders do the "running start" thing some expect, there will be more space for hitters to hit in the places they like to, creating at least some more singles

Macro : Not really. Very few of these guys were trying for singles, just to hit it hard and they happened to get over the ball.  It will turn a few groundball outs into hits, but won't effectively kill the 3 true outcome issue  

Unintended Consequences :  Baseball Defense becomes like football offense with men "in motion" all the time, timing the crossing of second or the grass dirt line. 

RULE CHANGE 2 : Get those at bats going - pitchers have a enforced clock to throw, hitters have an enforced clock to get in the box.

The micro problem : Pitchers and hitters are taking a lot of time in between pitches and no one likes that

The macro problem : Games are getting longer and coupled with the boredom it's bad news. 

Will it work?

Micro : Yes if you create penalties for guys to be in the box and throw it they won't waste time

Macro : Oh definitely. Look there's going to be a bit of leeway and the league average isn't that far from what forced expectations would be if pitchers take the max time (and expect them to try) but with almost 300 pitches per game a few seconds each rest time will add up.

Unintended Consequences : Some long rest pitchers will be adversely effected (Finnegan is a slow Nat) 

Expect more official requests for time. 

The pace of the game is the key and at times the game slows down for good reason. Late inning tense situations could feel rushed. 

If in the long run faster pitching favors the hitters the effect will be muted by more hits/walks. If it favors the pitching the already troubled offense could nose dive further. Like strike zone changes, you just don't know until you try! 

RULE CHANGE 3 : Too many pickoffs - basically you can try two pickoffs

The micro problem : Throwing over too much is dull and hurts baserunning

The macro problem : Baseball boring thing

Will it work? 

Micro : Likely yes, there will be fewer pick-offs with enforced penalties (duh) and runners can be more aggressive knowing that, and more so after two pick-off were made

Macro : Unclear. You are going to get an initial burst of baserunning as teams feel emboldened but the SB drop isn't about pick-offs. It's about the percentage of SB that you need to be successful on to make stealing worthwhile. We have to see where this ends up.

Unintended Consequences : with more limited pickoffs 1B don't have to hold men on, closing the 1B hole with a runner on 1B, hurting LH hitting with men on and indirectly offense in general if SB don't go up enough.

The best pitch to stop a SB is a fastball and we are already seeing a glut of young arms throwing near 100. If SB really peak there'd be even more emphasis on these types. 

RULE CHANGE 4 : Big Base -

The micro problem : Sometimes you step on the base and the other guy's foot is there. OUCH!

The macro problem : Injuries suck

Will it work?

Micro : Can't hurt

Macro : Won't hurt

Unintended Consequences : Technically intended - they hope bigger targets and a few inches reduced distance can help with SB but let's be honest - it's the pickoffs that matter there 

Can't really think of anything else. This is pretty harmless.

RULE CHANGE 5 : Position Players Pitching - maybe you can't use one until you are up by 10 or down by 8 or something.

The micro problem : Teams were declaring more and more games lost causes leading to seeing more and more position players pitching to save arm use, when norms used to only bring them out when ridiculously behind or completely necessary.

The macro problem : Teams are looking hard at optimizing their production and will break norms to do it

Will it work?

Micro : Yes. Rules are rules

Macro : No. This will stop only this. But teams will find something else to squeeze two more wins and a lot more fun out of the game. You really can't stop this line of thinking before hand only react to it.

Unintended Consequences : Teams might start designating a spot for a "garbage pitcher" / "long white flag" who pitches only in games they don't care about to save other arms. A "last arm in the pen" on steroids.

More Ohtani two/ways - offensive guys getting up to 20 IP in relief so they can qualify as a two-way player going forward

Teams down by 6 or 7 might start giving up runs to get to a point where it's ok to use a position player.

 

RULE CHANGE 6 : Extra Inning Man Here to Stay- man on second to start the 10th

The micro problem : Baseball games don't have a clock and thus can last forever and some people (Players, media, some fans) hate that

The macro problem : Baseball games too long thing

Will it work?

Micro : It does limit the number of extra long games, most game wrapping up by the 12th. Saving abut 70 games going past 11.

Macro : Not really, that's not even 3% of the games and if we talk about innings, which is more pertinent, we're saving like 1.5%. It's a blip. These aren't drivers of anything people are feeling about baseball

Unintended Consequences :

Messes with stats a little. 

Feels kind of bad to win a game under conditions that aren't the way the rest of the game is played. But this is a problem all sports (except for basketball) deal with.  Unless you have a lot of constant scoring just playing longer doesn't guarantee a break in ties and people don't generally like ending in ties.

 

RIP Ted

Ted Lerner has died. 

I've said it before but I'll say it again. While there are better owners, most of them are usually worse. Ted wanted to win and when the Nats needed to spend money to keep or get the players they needed to make that happen he spent that money.  It's hard to complain about that too much.  

Would it have been nice to spend money also when you were not good to be not terrible? Yes. That's a simple answer.  But that didn't seem to matter to him. He wasn't win at all costs. He was win at a reasonable cost (with a good idea of what that actually meant - not a euphemism for cheap) when there was a reasonable expectation that could happen. 

But most owners are "winning is a nice side benefit" types who are mostly interested in making money from the team. Ted didn't seem to be that - or at least wasn't until the recession hit his real estate.  We don't really know. Strasburg and Corbin ending up being the exact wrong horses to bet on makes just as much sense for the complete tear down.  

Back to the top though - He bought a team at 80 and won a title before he went.  Good for him.

Their trash - our treasure?

A twitter feed did a little two man draft of the remaining FAs putting them into teams and the question was asked - would these scrap heap teams be better than the Nats? 

We're not looking at depth here (we're only going one SP and RP deep) and the question is NOT which team would you rather have. For all the Nats' faults if these teams are relatively close in talent you'd rather have the Nats given the ages of the players. But would these teams be better? 

 

Corbin / Bundy / Wacha - Corbin is the most durable, but you'd rather have Wacha. Bundy is bad enough and hurt and slipping that you can't obviously choose him over Corbin, as surprising as that is.

Finnegan / Britton/ Moore - Matt Moore, who converted last year and really took to it, would be the choice here.  Finnegan is perfectly fine.  Britton hasn't been healthy since pre-pandemic.

Ruiz / Sanchez / Chirinos - I'd take Ruiz.  He's the best fielder (though Gary might surprise you in that he's not terrible), and he hit the best last year.  Sanchez is not that far behind but there's a difference between saying that for someone on the way up and someone on the way down. You only pick him over Ruiz if you desperately want homers. Chirinos had a good 2021 sandwiched around horrendous 2020 and 2022's.

Smith / Gurriel / Voit - I'd take... Voit?  Smith is the worst bat over the past couple seasons, but Gurriel was terrible in two of the last 3 and can't field. Does Dom's mediocre glove outshine Voit's average O?  That's up to you. I say no at 1B.

Garcai / Odor / Villar  All three weren't impressive last year.  Odor can sort of field, which Villar can't anymore and Garcia never could. But Odor has been bad with the bat for years. Basically you can argue Garcia might have the best year without improving at all, so you take him

Abrams / Iglesias / Andrus - Clear win for Andrus who hit ok last year (unusual for him) and can field.  Iglesias has been glove only forever.  Abrams is a big ?  For being better in 2023 only it's an easy choice.

Candelario / Culberson / Solano - Solano and Culberson are square pegs here as neither are really 3B. Culberson is like a bad Solano so he's out. Solano vs Candelario would normally come down to do you want a chance at good after a bad year or a chance at meh after a less than meh year? For being better in 2023 might say the latter but again, square pegs, Solano is a 2B mostly.  I'd take Candelario

Dickerson / Peralta / Profar -  It comes down to Peralta who might field ok, vs Profar who might hit and given Profar's wild swings from usable to not I'd go with Peralta.  Dickerson, a balloon slowly leaking major league skill, is third. A close third, but third.

Robles / Naquin / JBJ - Amazing Robles wins.  Naquin is just a guy you can stick in CF but he wouldn't be good. Unlike Victor or JBJ he might hit, but he also might not.  JBJ has been worse with the bat than Victor over the past 2 years and hasn't played as much CF. 

Thomas / Gamel / Grossman - Grossman is all about the weird surprise good year. That doesn't fit for my plan here.  Gamel is a butcher in the field and he doesn't hit that much better than Lane. Thomas wins out.

Meneses / Rios / Franmil - Franmil is intriguing. Rios should be a positive. But Meneses hit great last year. Yes, you don't have history of being able to do it, but you don't have history telling you what to expect either. 

I think the takeaway is no, you can't build a better team than the Nats from the scraps of FA. You can improve on Corbin, but we all know he's here at this point because the contract dictates it, not because the Nats want him.  There are better options that Smith and Abrams, but those aren't choices the Nats are making to be the best they can be in 2023. Matt Moore would be a boon to any pen and likely immediately the best arm in this one, but the fact he's still out there means he's probably asking for something teams won't give. If NO team in the MLB is willing to meet whatever bar he set, it's hard to blame the Nats for not doing so. 

The only question that arises from all this is "why Dickerson" as if you poked around the OF you could probably find a half-dozen guys you like better.  Not much better but better. Maybe he was the one that wanted to come here after they kicked some tires? The things we aren't privy to might shed some light, otherwise it's a small miss from the Nats. 

But who cares about small misses for this team?  108 losses instead of 107?  I think the fans will manage that disappointment. 

Today's Depth Chart and Questions

Boring boring boring. Man, being bad is boring. 

SP - (Strasburg?), Corbin, Williams, Gray, Gore, Cavalli. 

Questions - (1) Is Strasburg able to pitch or not? If he is, and he's close to normal, the rotation would take a more natural state with an ace on top, a couple of innings eaters / ok pitchers (Corbin - one hopes -  and Williams respectively), and young guys battling it out for the last spots.  Without him you force the ok guys to be the aces and all the young guys are slotted in to start.  The general sense is that no Strasburg is not ok, so whether this year is passable or not will come down to question 2.  (2) Will the young guys be any good?  Gray has flashed potential but has flashed more problems. Cavalli is a guy people are starting to not feel good about. Gore was a can't miss guy until he got hurt and began missing. The chances all three hit are next to none. But two would still go a long way to providing stability they'll need with the 5th spot undefined and Corbin a huge question mark on whether he can even remain in the rotation. 

Pen - Rainey (closer), Finnegan (setup), Harvey, Espino, Edwards Jr, Ramirez, Thompson, probably Francisco Perez because everyone I named so far is RH. 

(1) Who ends up closer for most of the year? The Nats like Rainey. And him as the closer makes Rizzo's trade for him more of a win than if he's the 7th inning guy. But he'll be out most of the year recovering from surgery. Finnegan was better last year and is projected to close. You know I like Harvey the best.

1B / DH - Dom Smith / Joey Meneses

(1) Who's playing what? Neither is great at first but Dom is signed to the contract and says he's more comfortable at first base. So he'll likely start there. But if he struggles and Joey doesn't and Joey wants to play there they could flip flop eventually. Or if Dom is a butcher in the field. (2) How real is Joey's 2022?  Meneses hit like a superstar for two months. Flash in the plan is likely but that doesn't mean he's going to be bad. It just means he settles somewhere below superstar. Of course bad is possible. It's a huge question mark from a guy that hasn't shown consistency in the minors to have you believe anything

2B - Luis Garcia

(1)  Can Garcia make a step up at the plate? He's going to put the bat on the ball. Can he walk a little more, or hit for a little more power and take himself from useful starter to good player? (Along with the pen and Ruiz, Garcia is the least questionable question for 2023)

SS - CJ Abrams

(1) Who is CJ Abrams really?  Is he the top prospect with a solid bat, good eye, with the ability to hold down SS who if he developed a little power and is allowed to use his speed could be a star?  Or is he a slap hitting major leaguer who the Nats will keep on a leash on the basepaths and lacks the fundamentals to not be a negative at the demanding shortstop position? It's anyone's guess

3B - Jeimer Candelario

(1) Was last year a fluke?  For his career no one was really excited about Candelario but looked like he could be a decent major leaguer and for a couple seasons in Detroit he was. But last year was a mess. He was hurt a bit, he seemed to change his approach at the plate. He's at the age guys decline and he still looked bad in the Domician Winter League, even taking into account no one hits there. Another flier that could swing wildly, but failure here wouldn't matter as much as with Gore or Abrams.

OF Thomas / Robles / Dickerson

(1) How long do Dickerson and Robles hold on to their jobs? Face it Robles career is on life support and the only reason he's still starting for the Nats is the team's great fear that another team will fix him and make him useful. But the tension is real and it's not helping a guy who was probably set with outsized expectations to start. The bar is pretty low for him- field well and don't hit too bad - but he hasn't reached it for a few years.  Dickerson has basically been an average bat for three years now and given he's pretty trash in the field he needs to keep that up to make playing him worthwhile. It's another "not a big ask" and it's asking for just repeating what has been done instead of returning but Dickerson is 34 now. (2) Will anyone push them?  They love to tell you about Alex Call who if nothing else, and that may be true, has a great eye. Vargas is just a guy but that may be better than what they put out there. Hassell could have a hot start and if so, why hold him back with guys like Garcia, Gore and Abrams already in the lineup?  There's no commitment to these guys as prospects or long term pieces so any hot AAA start would be cause for "why not try it"

C Ruiz

(1) Can Ruiz hit better? Similar to Garcia Ruiz is set at his position now and has been worth starting thanks to some decent hitting for average. Also similar he could use some patience or pop improvement. Unsimilar to Garcia, Ruiz is actually a good catcher. Which means a slight improvement with the bat could make him an All-Star type player for the tough position.

More more rankings and the boring offseason

 Keith Law put his out and just to post the numbers (pay him if you want the analysis) Wood (16), Green (35), Hassell (43), Cavalli (71), House (85).  I'll reiterate my thoughts that ranking prospects is primarily about not missing the next superstar and secondarily about figuring out who will do what in the majors so expect young guys with raw talent to be overrated. Nothing particularly new, other than a stronger belief in House than others. 

This has been a dreadfully boring off-season.  Last year was also fairly boring but it brought us the aftermath of the Scherzer/Turner deal which gave the team a couple young players to immediately stick in the majors and more importantly it put a clock on Soto.  That was the dominant conversation and shaped our feelings about some of the signings.  Maybe there is a long term plan around keeping Soto?  What fools we were. 

This year Soto is gone and there isn't anyone good around you care about that makes sense being dealt. No one wants Stras (contract, broken arm) or Corbin (contract, terrible arm). There are some guys with more interesting upsides than last year, like Trevor Williams and Dom Smith and Jeimer Candelario, rather than the guys you knew in 2022 but even if they fit a mold of who the Nats should go after they don't spur interest. 

Also - unlike past years there aren't a lot of good players waiting to get signed. D-first Elvis Andrus? Disappointing one-note Gary Sanchez? Aging fast David Peralta? Yawn.  I guess the Correa journey was interesting but that's over now. Vague interest in if the Rangers did enough to make some moves? I suppose. The Mets are spending to get over the top, but because they did that last year it feels less exciting.

But really it comes down to your local team and the Nats are in a holding pattern. 2023 is about seeing what the young guys do all across the organization and how that may shape the next few years. Its about selling the team or not. It's about if there is anything left to squeeze from Strasburg or if they can get something back for a smarter signing like Williams than they did for their 2022 one-offs that came up empty.  

It's about a lot of stuff but what it is not about is winning on the field.

More rankings - insanity follows

 I don't get to see a list of names but little birdies tweeting tell me Baseball Prospectus has put out their list and it has 

3 - James Wood

66 - Robert Hassell 

68 - Elijah Green 

71 - Cade Cavalli 

Given last post rankings, it's almost as if they have an idea of how well an organization is overall and then hand out rankings based on that. Make Wood a future star and you got to kick everyone else down a notch.  But that would undermine the "deep serious science" behind these things. And at some point, despite them saying it doesn't, these things effect each other. Maybe not in the same year but there's probably some of that.

Nothing in particular changes from last time other than Baseball Pro is trying to tell you Wood is a can't miss guy (Jo Adell would like a word with your rankings) and they feel the other guys are drifting out of "sure major leaguer" into more "cup of coffee and breakfast" territory. 

But really no single prospect list should be taken as gospel.  Look at them all and get a feel for where your guy is and what they have to do (within reasonable expectation) this year to meet, exceed or fail according to these expectations set up. 

Wood

Meet - Start in High A, hit incredibly well, move to AA and not struggle.  ETA late 2024 if all goes right.

Exceed- At some point this year hit extremely well in AA too setting up a clear start of 2024 debut with ROY expectations. 

Fail - At some point getting to AA and struggling.

Wood has the patience and likely the power, so it comes down mainly to if the K-rate can avoid jumping up and causing a problem.

Hassell 

Meet - Make it to AAA, hitting for same overall power as last year and holding his own

Exceed - Make it to AAA hitting for power more like he did in San Diego's minors. He'd likely be hitting well enough to for the Nats to consider if they need to call him up this year.

Fail - Continue to struggle in AA with power issues as he did in Nats minors

Had the same bump in K-rate Wood did but with a bit more history seems unlikely to stick. However the drop in power with the Nats is concerning and another year might cause him to be considered more of a slap hitter in the majors.

Green 

Meet - Hit well in single A

Exceed - Hit great in single A

Fail - Hit poorly in single A

It's pretty simple given what I said yesterday. They don't want to miss Green taking it to the next level so they put him in. But it's at a spot where solid work in low minors is enough to meet expectations given his age.

Cavalli 

Meet - Spend most of the season in the majors, with a reasonable ERA that would keep him in the rotation next season. (say 5.50 or below)

Exceed - Spend basically all year in the majors and pitch at least ok (ERA closer to 4.00)

Fail - Spend most of the season in AAA failing in the majors to a point where he can't be kept there

Cavalli is at an age where it's almost put up or shut up time.  He'll get his major league shot if he's even ok in AAA and they'll want to see him set himself up to be a safe rotation guy. There's plenty of room for improvement (fewer hits, more Ks, less BBs) but this last step is the hardest. 

 

Again this is meeting the expectations set up by the rankings. But the rankings are just guesses. These guys will find their level.  

One of the hard things about this is things can break "fairly" in a number of ways with wildly different results.  Let's say one exceeds expectations, two meet, and one fail.  If it's Exceed - Green, Meet - Hassell and Cavalli, Fail - Wood, the Nats aren't in great shape. Wood and Hassell both look like major leaguers but maybe not impact guys and with no specific rush to be called up. They get to see Green bump up to a Wood like level in next years rankings but as seen by Wood that only means so much. Let's say it's Exceed - Wood, Meet - Green, Cavalli, Fail - Hassell.  The Nats quite possibly have a future star on their hands in Wood, and Green is gaining momentum as at least a solid major leaguer,  which makes Hassell becoming more of a 4th OF guy far more palatable. The 2025-6 major league OF is one year of expectations met from being set.

Prospects Rankings!

 Baseball America says the Nats have actual prospects! 

• Wood 11 
• Hassell 57
• Green 58
• Cavalli 61

There are kind of two things to judge... ok THREE things to judge here. 

1) What happens to guys around this level? Obviously baseball isn't introducing 100 new stars every year. Not 50, not 20, not even 10. Just a couple of great players come into the league each year.  If you think about a 60 man All-Star game and 15 year careers, it would be about 4 a year. So consider that before getting too excited. 

2)  Are guys going up or down? The level is the level but you prefer guys exceeding expectations or at least maintaining it, than losing momentum.

3) Age/level. How much of this is possibility and how much is reality? They bake these things in a little bit but you still have to think about it a little.Especially when you think about 1.  A 24 year old at 50 and a 19 year old at 50 might in theory have the same general expectation but they have much different variances. (IOW the 19 year old could break out in the minors over the next 2+ years, the 24 year old is likely to enter the majors now and be ok).

James Wood - 20 in 2023 - Low A - unranked last year :  Around this level you are looking at guys they like to be impact players, but it's still a gamble. In 2020 you had Pache and Kelenic at that level. Robles sat around there for a couple years. It's not a bad spot to be in, but if you want Wood to be a star, you'd like to see him tick up closer to Top 5 before he's ready for a call up. The age and level and immediate bump up from nowhere to nearly Top 10 suggest people think it's possible. At this level you are setting Wood's floor as "major leaguer".

Robert Hassell - 21 in 2023 - AA - 30 last year : the middle of the Top 100 is filled a big mix, everything from the occasional All-Star to guys that never made it.  But the general sense is a competent baseball player with youth and level giving the player a bit more potential of something more.  Hassell is young and at a nice level so the possibility lies of a bump up. He did drop presumably for two reasons. He didn't develop another power level as hoped and he struggled in the Nats org after hitting for the Padres.  One assumes that if either of those changes he'd be back around where he was last year. But if he doesn't, he could fall to the bottom.

Elijah Green -  19 in 2023 - Rookie - unranked last year (not in minors yet) : The most complete guessing game. He has the physical talent. He did very well in rookie ball. People like to bet on these types.  Me I'm looking at 21Ks in 52 PAs and getting worried. But who knows? Let's get him a full year in Low A and see.  Complete guess work ranking you make because you don't like it when a guy like Wood hits great in a handful of rookie league games you DON'T rank him and then all of a sudden he rocks Low A too. Better to put a guy at 60 and let him go up to 10 or off the ranking than, keep him off because you haven't seen enough and then want him in your Top 20. So yeah I'm saying this ranking is a complete coin flip cover your butt ranking.

Cade Cavalli - 24 in 2023 - AAA - 27 last year : He looked ok in AAA last year. Hard to hit and kept the ball in the park, but walked a couple more than he should and didn't K quite as many as you like. It makes you wonder if he can keep enough major leaguers off the bases. He's dropping as last year's ranking was in part about a fast rise and holding his own and by some continued flashing of impressive K numbers. He couldn't repeat the former last year and didn't repeat the latter. They'll be wanting to see K/9 numbers well over 10 and a drop in BB9, if only modest, in AAA to feel better about Cavalli. He's got this year really to do it because at 25 you want him in the majors full time.

TLDR : They like Wood as a player and maybe a star. They like Hassell as a player but not as a star. They think Green has all the potential to be like Wood. They are souring on Cavalli.

Some other updates from last year :

Keibert Ruiz 11 - He's now an official major leaguer.  If you want to see what an 11 means.

Brady House 59 - hurt last year and off this year. He was essentially the Green of last year. Hit in rookie, put in middle of the pack to cover the chance he could do well. Didn't. Dropped off and no one says anything about the ranking last year. 

CJ Abrams 9 - Everyone really did like Abrams to be a star and he flirted with that "we're saying as close to a sure thing as we can" but didn't quite get there. Was everyone wrong? It happens. But there's potential for more here still.

Walk, Don't Run. Wait, don't walk either

 First off listen to "Walk, Don't Run"  

 OK done? 

Based of the signing of never-walker Corey Dickerson, Commenter Anagramsci made an off-handed comment that the Nats are trying to set a record for the fewest walks ever for a team. Now of course that can't be true - baseball has been around for too long and has too many weird periods for this to work. A lot of those early seasons were not even 154 games and played under different rules. But is it possible. 

First let's look at the Nats. The Nats finished 14th in the NL in walks taken last year but the two biggest walkers were Juan Soto (91 in 101 games) and Josh Bell (49 in 103).  By rate you can imagine they even more dominate the team if they were the leaders despite only playing 60% of the season in DC.  Soto is one of the premier patient bats in baseball today, walking 20.9% of the time last year and Bell walked 11.2%.  Next best for the Nats was Nelson Cruz (9.7%) also gone.  They also traded Ehire Adrianza (8.5%) and have since dropped Cesar Hernandez (7.3%) and Luke Voit (7.1%) who were all in the Nats Top 10 in rate

So who's left?  Well if you don't care about small sample size Alex Call (9.6%) is ok, but he might not play much. Then it's Riley Adams (7.7%) but he might not play at all. The first real starter for 2023 is Lane Thomas at 7.5%.  

We'll stop here for some context.  What is the average walk rate in the MLB? 8.2%  Is the NL any different, possibly with a lingering pre DH approach? Slightly higher at 8.4%. The short of that is that the most patient returning starter bat for the Nats is below average. 

Ok but the Nats don't have a lot of full-time returning bats. Thomas, Ruiz (6.9%), Robles (4.3%!), Garcia (2.9%!!!!) and these guys are young. Maybe there is a newcomer who will walk? Or a young guy who might had an off year? Let's go around the diamond :

• Ruiz - no he's never walked
• Meneses - (6.3% in 2022) - not a walker
• Garcia - nope
• Abrams - (1.7%!!!!!!!!!!!! - he walked 2 times for the Nats last year) very limited stats even considering minor leagues but early indications are hahahahahah
• Candelario - (6.0%) maybe.  He had been an above average walker, say in the 10% range, for his career until last year and patient in the minors. If he's right he's a decently patient hitter likely to be above average.
  
• Smith - (7.9%) this was one of his better years. He's probably more likely to be around where Thomas was last year. 7-7.5. Below average but not terrible 
• Thomas - another maybe. historically he's walked more with more ABs until last year. One might think he was trying to prove something last year and he'll settle down this year into an above average spot? Or maybe teams just figured out how to pitch to him
• Robles -  there are other things the guy might get back to doing well, walking is not one of those. 
• Dickerson - (4.0%) nope

This is alarming.  You have one good bet to be above average in Candelario and one I'd call coin flip in Thomas and 7 guys who should range from below average to will never walk.

Hmmm what about Ildemaro Vargas?  Definitely not. Does not walk. Alex Call? Yes. If he plays he will probably walk above average.

I don't know Jeter Downs? Actually pretty possible, if he can hit. Minors are good. Jake Alu? No. Adams or Pineda if Ruiz gets hurt? A yes on Adams, presuming same as Downs. A no on Pineda.

So it's bleak. The Nats should be WELL below average with an off chance of just being below average if the right guys make it into the lineup and can hit ok enough that they get pitched to in a way that will allow them to walk.  (remember the goal here is just walking. A Call/Downs/Adams lineup would likely be terrible for other reasons) 

Ok so let's throw out a guess of rate - say 6.5% that's probably the high bar.  And of PA. They had almost 6000 last year. Let's just say that for now.  That would be 390 walks. Where would that put them all time for 161/162 game seasons? 

Pretty solid - 25th worst! Tied with the 2017 Royals. 

What do they need to be the worst? Technically the record is held by the 1904 Tigers and 344 wlaks who played 162 games thanks to 10 ties? Look it was strange times. Let's go with the 1966 Cardinals and 345 walks. That's a 5.75% walk rate for the year with 6K PA*  Can the Nats do it?

Without Soto, Bell and Cruz their walk rate was .... 5.47%.  Signing Candelario was a bad move but guys... there's a real chance here. 

(oh the post title - the Nats don't steal either but no one does)

*They had 5964.  It's very consistent around 6K, with more likely slightly over than under.  The Nats will either have to really stink or walk a little less.

Corey Dickersonamania

 Reports are the Nats are bringing Corey Dickerson.  He's a name you've heard of so maybe he's good? Let's see. 

At his peak Dickerson was guy you could stick in LF and accept it. He's not at his peak anymore. He's also not fast. 

His value comes entirely from his bat. How is that? Well he's not patient (and OBP of .324 with an average of .281) but luckily somewhere in the past few years he realized that he couldn't just grip it and rip it and cut way down on his strikeouts. He's a contact guy. He had pop in the past but since turning 30 that's mostly gone and he's a 15 homer guy maybe. 

He had been holding pretty steady in the type of hits he'd have but last year he had a big drop in hard hits. That's ok as long as those hard hits become medium hits and no medium hits become soft hits. That's what happened last year so he maintained an average offensive profile. Can he repeat it another year? Or have a little bounce back?

He's a lefty bat who is seeing the most rapid drop against lefty pitching. He very clearly shouldn't be facing and LHP which means he's not an everyday starter. 

In short : He's a "professional hitter". A guy who spent his life putting good contact on the ball and hitting all types of hits to all types of places in the field.  When he was younger it could all come together into some pretty decent seasons at the plate but those days are probably gone. He's not a bad option for a 4th OF or a platoon player with a righty masher.  But given his splits, his poor defense, and his lack of speed, he can't be an everyday player in the majors.

I'll have to see how the Nats use him to judge it, but the real problem isn't that the Nats signed Dickerson, who could be a usable player on most teams, but the fact he might be one of their better bats.

Dom Smith and Company

 Since I last wrote the Nats picked up Dominic Smith. Out of everyone signed so far Dom Smith is the most interesting because Dom Smith (1) has all the bonafides of once being a top prospect and (2) performed in the major leagues. 

Jeter Downs was simply the best the Red Sox had at the time (and probably slightly over inflated because of that) and was terrible in his first delayed cup of coffee. 

Michael Chavis wasn't Jeter Downs but scraped the idea of a top prospect before being eaten alive by major league pitching once he had more than a half-season up here

Derek Hill (I bring him up because he was in the Jesse column on a similar topic) only made the very bottom of a top prospect list on the strength of his pre-minors work alone and his claim to fame is almost being average in a quarter of a season a couple years ago. 

But Dom Smith was drafted high in the first round (11). He broke into some Top Prospect lists early and managed to raise his profile into the middle of them before making the majors.  Once there after a few disappointing starts, he clicked and hit very well over the course of about a full season of games across 2019-2020. That's... kind of real.  

Kind of.

The problem with Dominic is at his core he's a high average hitter... and nothing else. OK, that's not entirely fair. He did hit for some power in that 19-20 stretch. But that was an anomaly when compared to his other hitting. This includes looking at his days in the minors. Could he have developed power? Sure, there is always some expectation of that. But would you expect that from someone who's career minor league ISOSLG was .130? I don't see it.

He does not walk but he is not a contact hitter. He strikes out a fair amount at least at the major league level. He is not a good fielder. He's probably naturally a fit for 1B or even DH. But those are positions you give your best hitters. If Dom was hitting .300 consistently, ok it's fine even if he has no power but he's not and it's hard to put a guy trying to figure things out there and wasting those at bats. 

Even so with all that I'm ok with this move because Dom's situation hasn't been great. He's been injured and had better guys signed over him and wasn't in a good spot at the end with the Mets. I don't think he's the .200 nothing hitter he ended at with the Mets. My guess is he's better than the .240 line put up before that too. It seems like the question is - is he be a .280+ guy with some pop that he might have matured into or is he a .250-.260 doubles hitter that the minor league stats and a lot of his major league career would suggest.  But really the question is - how long do the Nats take to find out? It's fun to amass guys who might be something. But to figure out if a guy is something he should probably play a fair amount.  A third a season? A half? and it's very tempting when you have a bucket of stuff to throw one away and try something new.  

Dom Smith is a guy they should commit to. They should give him half a year, not Hello my name is Alex Call or Jake Alu. Can they do it? Rebuilding is not about finding the hot hand. It's about taking the best prospects giving them real chances and seeing if they stick.  Let's see if they can do it. 

As for the other guys - yes they are first round picks but we've noted before - there's a big difference in top 7ish first round picks and after that. The Top picks are usually very good bets to be good major leaguers. Maybe not great ones, though some will be, but good ones. After that historical performance shows quick drop off.  The end of the first round where Hill (23), Downs (32) and Chavis (26) were taken are guys that have 2-3 WAR careers. Fill in players are the expectations.  If that doesn't make sense to you think of it this way.  There are 30 teams with players roughly from 20-34. That's 15 years of drafts.  If lower first round picks were usually very good every team would have like 10 very good or better players. The league would be swimming in great players. It isn't.

While Downs, Chavis, and Hill are better bets than a 3rd, or 10th, or 18th rounder at having the natural talent to be a great player, history tells us that the best bet to lay on them is that they are just guys that float in and out of the majors.  The Nats have been drafting at the back of the draft for a few years now. That's part of the reason they are where they are. Getting other teams guys from there, ones that aren't connecting. Well it's better than random minor leaguers or old major leaguers on their way out, but it's still not a winning strategy, at least not if it's the Nats best move, which it appears to be.  Give me a few more Dom Smith type moves though and I'll change my mind.

New Year, New You, Same Nats

 The Nats did nothing over the holidays.  Most teams did very little but the Nats did extra little, or at least they did very little of impact.They did

Avoided arbitration with Tanner Rainey - the pen was ok.  Rainey was an ok part of it.  He may even be good - though if he is he should show that for a full season soon. Good results and good stats. 

Claimed Jeter Downs - he was a big prospect in a kind of weak Boston system, basically the only one people really liked. If he could manage to rein in a swing that had a tendency to get kind of wild he should hit for power and average. But he didn't and failed spectacularly at trying to do so in fact. That's how he ended up here.  A not a SS SS he's definitely worth a look but also very likely nothing. It's dumpster diving in the dumpsters of fine establishments.

DFA's Reed Garrett to make room for Downs - who's Reed Garrett? An arm. 

Signed Michael Chavis - he's a middle infielder with some power who WILL NOT WALK and thus has to have more power to be worth player. But a former Red Sox first round draft pick <looks at Red Sox> Hmmmm maybe these aren't the guys to emulate.

Anyone want to talk about any of these guys? No? Didn't think so.

Not news, but notes

I guess the Nats have done SOME things in the past week. In case you missed it

Signed Ronald Herrera (an arm), Matt Adams, Travis Blankenhorn (26ish moderate power hitting IF/OF), and Anthony Castro (27 wild arm with a tendency to leave meatballs out there) . Thes are all guys with at least a cup of coffee in the majors who will now be AAAA depth for a woeful top level minors) 

Signed Tommy Romero.  Romero was with the Nats last year and didn't show well, but has a decent amount to like and is at the tail end of age relevance as opposed to over it.  Worth looking at another year.  Yes, that is the same Matt Adams the Nats had previously. As you can imagine time has not been kind.

Brought back Erasmo Ramirez. A perfectly competent reliever last year who could be stretched out to long relief (HINT HINT)  Might have been able to squeeze a few more dollars out of someone else but found a comfort level here last year after 4 years of wandering in the desert so probably was fine coming back. The pen is solid. Not great, but solid. 

Watched Seth Lugo sign elsewhere.  Not a surprise at all but the Nats were hoping for another Trevor Williams situation by probably offering Lugo a rotation role if he wanted it. Lugo though is a little older and probably a little more keyed in to "might be out of the game in 3-5 years" so went after maybe a worse position but on a much better team. 

Saw Erick Fedde off the Korea.  Sadly we won't be able to watch Fedde fail to meet expectations for the 7th year in a row. Erick who at his best looked possibly like a decent back of the rotation starter, was the first 1st round gambles that didn't work out for the Nats after a run that did. Even excluding Stras and Bryce you had

Drew Storen - he DID immediately relieve and relieve well in the majors, but paraphrasing had a million dollar arm and a 10 cent psyche. 

Rendon - you know Rendon

Brian Goodwin - VERY late first round pick (supplemental actually) got a half decade of average performance out

Alex Meyer - A top notch prospect shifted off the the death mounds of Minnesota* who showed a flash of rotation ability before his arm broke for good. 

Lucas Giolito - A guy the Nats couldn't develop that the White Sox could and has been between a very good and ok starter.

So a solid run of useful to good players. Undeniably major league talented. Then came the doldrums :

Erick Fedde, Carter Kieboom, Dane Dunning (who ok is major league talented), Seth Romero, Mason Denaburg (who ok is still a question given injury)

The Nats had used a lot of the first group to get talent to stay in the hunt for a championship so they needed the second group, once they decided they didn't want to trade them and pump up the payroll to Dodger/Yankee levels, to be talented players who developed into good to useful players. They haven't. Fedde was the start of that. Maybe tomorrow will be an all Fedde post

 

*I talked about this before - Minnesota was probably the WORST at developing major league pitching for a decade plus. Worse than the Nats of the time. Meyer got there at the tail end of that and unsurprisingly did not get developed even with the injury. He almost made it after getting to the Angels of all places but alas the arm couldn't stay together.  Honestly I think this was a guy with top rotation talent that had the worst of breaks.

Hmmm Huh Wha?

There's a lot of exciting things going on in baseball as the money teams double down on winning. 

The Nats are not a money team right now. 

There is nothing exciting going on with the Nats. 

This isn't a surprise

A week and a half ago Fangraphs did their ZiPS projections. It's just one projection system of many but it gives you an idea of what the Nats are like. 

The answer is an offense with boring production. It's pretty easy to get to average production at a position cheaply and the Nats have basically done it across the board.  That doesn't exactly equate with an average offense, stars matter. But it should be watchable most nights. What is boring?  It's Robles hitting .255 with little patience or pop but pretty solid CF defense. It's Joey Meneses hitting 25+ homers, but seeing his average fall to around .245 and not walking much. It's Luis Garcia hitting .265 with maybe 20 homers while never walking and playing subpar D.  In short it's a bunch of guys hitting about .250 and doing something else right, while doing everything else a little wrong.

I guess I could say there isn't anything GOOD exciting because the starting pitching could be BAD exciting. There are boring numbers out there for Gray and Gore and Cavalli.  Throwing either 150 IP of 4.50 ball (Gray) or 100+IP or 4.00 ball (Gore and Cavalli) and there's some variation here. They could be better, or they could be much worse. But unlike with the offense what I haven't mentioned isn't ok. It's bad. It's a bunch of guys forced to throw 50-100 innings of over 5.00 ball. So if these three hit the middling expectations it will be bad. If they can't do that... it could be exciting bad! 

There isn't much to do now but grab another low level starter and then see what falls. 

Low Level Starters left 

Wade Miley - hurt last year and 36 but pretty decent in 2021

Zack Greinke - Mr. I want to go somewhere where they can win doesn't have that choice anymore. I'd say he could teach the kids things but he's Greinke. Who knows what he will or won't do. But I'm sure he'll eat up innings if you let him and the Nats need that. 

Jordan Lyles - He was in Baltimore last year so he wouldn't even have to move far. That's a selling point! Given his age he could be another 2 year deal guy where if he's surprisingly ok this year he might get something back. Though less than Williams bc Lyles has no history of being very good, merely average. 

Dylan Bundy / Michael Pineda / Carlos Martinez - if you are going to throw a deal at someone just for depth might as well be someone everyone really liked at some point, even if it was years ago. 

Guys who could drop 

Jose Iglesias - Can't hit but the guy can still field and that's not something you can really say about any of the Nats IFs. Would make a good off the bench guy or a good SS if Candelario fails and Abrams shifts to 3B. 

Gary Sanchez - It's sort of fun to have a guy swing out of his shoes every AB. And he's not old.  Look, good players don't fall. 

Andrew McCutchen - I like Cutch. Sign Cutch.

Trevor Williams Will Start

He said so. 

The base truth is the Nats need help. They need help starting and they need help relieving the starters who will start. Anywhere you can put a decent pitcher will help the team. Trevor Williams was a good pitcher last year. 

In his career Williams started out as a nice rotation guy, not a 1 or 2 but a guy you could throw in at 3 or 4.  He never struck out enough, but he didn't walk too many and kept the ball down, meaning fewer homers and hits.  But that skill set went away in 2019 and it didn't come back until the Mets made him a reliever in 2021. 

But Williams doesn't want to relieve he wants to start and a team like the Nats - who are not looking to win right now and are completely ok with letting a guy work out kinks for a couple months - is an ideal landing spot for him. If they promise he will start (barring being terrible) they can get him and they did!

I don't think this is ideal. I think having a good reliever that can go multiple innings several times a week will be crucial to team whose rotation might not have anyone average 5 innings a start next year. 

BUT saying that a good pitcher pitching anywhere is helpful and one thing Williams can do being under a 2 year cheap deal.  If he can pitch well as a starter he can be traded for something. Not something great - that's not how things work anymore for a journeyman starter. But something more than nothing. Something interesting as opposed to fake interesting. 

The Nats also grabbed AJ Alexy from the Rangers and let DFA'd Lucius "vomited on the field" Fox.  AJ Alexy strikes out a bunch of guys but is wild as anyone. That's wild in terms of throwing balls in the strike zone and wild in not just leaving meatballs down the middle. In 30 IP in the majors he's given up 5 homers  and 27 in 110 IP in AAA. At 25 he's a guy you just throw out there in the minors and see if you get lucky.  Fox... he's never been good so goodbye. Glad you got your cup of coffee. 

You're going to make me argue CHEEEP again? Plus - Rule V stuff!

I'm starting to get a little angry here because you guys (ok well TWO guys in the comments) were arguing a point I didn't make which was "the Lerners are generally CHEEEEP and that cheapness got them to this point"  First off somewhere in the 2015/6 range it became clear that the Lerners would spend money to maintain a title contending team. Fears of thriftiness dominating the teams future, which were legitimate given that was most of what we saw before then, were dismissed. The Lerners were not unilaterally cheap.  Second, we don't really know if the Lerners dislike of spending money led to here. Yes they like to offer lower-market deals with deferred money. But lower-market deals with deferred money are still market deals and some guys take them. Strasburg did. Corbin did. The question we'll never know is if Stras and Corbin looked like a 1-2 going into the end of 2021 - how would that have affected the future. Do they keep Trea around? Do they sign Soto long term? We don't know. But the fact was the huge outlay of money they put into two pitchers was giving them very close to actually nothing and even with the good players they had it was tough to keep them in contention. They would either have to spend like the Yankees/Dodgers/WhateverTeamsAreCurrentlySpendingATon* or they would have to rebuild. While I lie squarely on the "SPEND MONEY ON YOUR HOBBY YOU ARE INCREDIBLY RICH AND THE VALUE OF THE TEAM IS INSANE" side I'm not going to deny the Lerners, by not doing that, are no different than at least 25 other owners. 

What I WAS saying is that the Lerners, when the team IS BAD, have shown themselves to be CHEEEEP. It was true 2005-2010. It's been true the past few years.  It seems a fair thing to believe as long as the team is bad they will not spend money. You can hope that that means they are just planning to spend later when the young players develop but you are assuming these young players will develop to a similar point where the Nats were post 2010 and when they began to take on bigger contracts for the first time. That's a big question mark. And if they DON'T develop into a Stras/Bryce/Zimm+ core... do you still think the Lerners will spend? I would bet no, but we've never seen them face that "rebuild 1 didn't work" scenario so maybe I'm wrong. 

Of course this is all complicated by the sale which it's reasonable to think that the team, if it can't be good, wants as little useless money on the books as possible. 

So wrapping up

• Lerners have shown themselves (twice is a pattern) to be selectively cheap
• We don't know how this would play out for an extended down period
• The slightly better guess is they'd continue not to spend and the impending sale of the team also suggests little money coming in for now. 

In conclusion

DOOOM (for the next year or two if you want a team that can pretend to compete)

 

The Nats drafted Thad Ward in the Rule V draft and later traded for Rule V pick Francisco Tostado.   Thad has to stay on the 40 man all year but Frankie is a AAA Rule V guy so he does not. Are these guys any good? 

Thad Ward - former 5th round pick who looked good at 22 in A ball but after the COVID year the Red Sox moved him up to AA and he flailed and got hurt. They restarted him this year and he ended up in AA and looked pretty decent but again didn't pitch as much as he could do to injuries. As far as pitching goes his problem is control as he has hard to hit, swing and miss stuff that stays in the park. Walking 4-5 guys per 9 in the minors usually is a bad sign. But really the problem is those injuries. He's thrown a total of 59 innings since 2019. Can someone like that at 26 stay on a major league roster even if he manages some control? It's not a bad Rule V pick - this is what the best of them look like. Legit talent, big questions.

Francisco Tostado - a 19th round draft pick with overall ok stats. Moderate power, ok average, doesn't strike out too much, could walk a bit more. He was both hurt and in the lower offense AA side and he's a fan favorite for some reason. So there's worse bats to stick in AAA for a year. Frankly the Nats have so little he's really blocking nothing and could hit terribly and it still be fine. 

LATE BREAKING UPDATE 

Nats to sign Trevor Williams! -  He's better than Ryan Yarborough but that lead to a potential issue. The Nats need that long reliever but they might be tempted to start Williams. In fact, Williams might only agree to come to DC IF he can start. That's not terrible for the Nats but it's not optimal for a team that is putting out 5 guys who may not go 5. They NEED a middle reliever. So if Williams is starting, well they still need to go out and get a long reliever. Or two or three. But as signings go this is perfectly fine and acceptable any way it goes. He was good last year showing a bit better control while not owing to a lot of luck. Kept guys more off-balance. Maybe he learned something he needed to and if you can turn anything into a real prospect it's a pitcher under contract for another year.

*Mets, Phillies, and Padres for now

For the kids out there

There are kids, well not even kids, who have never known THIS type of Nats team. If you were say 5-6-7 when the Nats run started to take shape you can't really remember the before times. The years before 2011 when the Nats were a perfectly good team that people in baseball were eyeing as an up-and-comer, or even before 2010 when a watchable Nats team were looking toward at least an interesting future with rookie Stephen Strasburg and the pick of Bryce Harper coming. These young adults anywhere from 16-19 have no idea what they are in for.  Let me explain. 

From 2006-2009/10 the Lerners were known primarily for one thing - being cheap. Or as we liked to say at the time CHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP.  There was talk behind the scenes about how Lerner would make sure outgoing mail was scrutinized to see if it HAD to go out Fed Ex. It was well known the minors were kept together as cheaply as possible, and the payrolls were grim. 20th in 2006, 28th in 2007, 26th in 2008, 27th in 2009. 

The team was looking for every way to save a buck and that meant things like inviting 36 pitchers to Spring Training in 2007 looking for the needle in the haystack rather than signing a couple decent arms. If you want to be technical it did work. It made the teams starting pitching merely very bad instead of the horrible it was in 2006 and 2008. But that hardly mattered to fans who stayed away in droves, even when the new park opened. 

Of course things eventually changed. Supplementing the lone bright spot, Ryan Zimmerman, the Nats drafted Strasburg and Bryce and then signed Werth. They had some Bowden guys develop to be surprisingly good or at least ok in Espinosa, Desmond, and Zimmerman. Rizzo fleeced the Twins in one deal for Ramos and made a savvy shift of a bunch of decent talent to the A's for Gio in another. It all came together at once and when it was apparent something was happening the money commitment came. But not before two generational talents landed and you could fairly piece out the Nationals C, 2B, SS, 3B, RF, 2SP and closer for the next 5 years or so.  Sure something or two here wouldn't work at all but chances are you find something usuably average to take their place.  You were building around All-Star Zimm and projected All-Stars Strasburg and Bryce. 

Now where are the Nats? They don't have their All-Star Soto signed long-term because they didn't have their All-Star Stras and Bryce to make keeping him worthwhile in their mind. Instead they have... I don't know.  If the Nats are lucky Garcia (or I guess Abrams) becomes Zimm. Hassell or Wood becomes Bryce. Gore or Cavalli become Strasburg.  Then maybe you can look around and see if those other pieces are there. If Ruiz and Gray can really be relied on for a few years. If you have a couple more bats and a reliever you like. But Zimm, Stras and Bryce after 2010 - each one was a very good bet to keep doing something good years out. As good as you maybe could do as long as you felt TJ for Stras would go well. The names I listed now... they aren't as good bets. They aren't bad ones as far as baseball goes but they aren't the "surprise if they aren't good"  bets that the Nats three was in 2010. 

 So the question is what do the Lerners do here? And what do the Lerners do here if they are still trying to sell. Their inclination in bad years is to do as little as possible. If you are going to go that route and you are trying to sell... well you are going to go all the way. No money spent. Bad team after bad team. 

This is a bad time for Nats fans and right now the only way it gets brighter is amazing luck.  Either nearly every young prospect pans out to a major league player with some stars and suddenly the Nats find themselves in 2010 redux where going after a Werth makes sense OR you get a new owner soon and they are fine throwing money around.  Any other outcome and this dark age could be darker and longer than the 2006-2009 run. This is what history tells us. Sorry kids.

Offseason Position Discussion - Relief Pitching

 What's it mean to be a bright spot on a team that won 55 games? Sometimes you are the lone All-Star, a singular talent raging against the trash world you've been fated on.  On the other end of the spectrum, at times you are a position where a collection of cast-offs, second chances, and wannabes happen to click enough to be completely average. In 2022 the Nats pen was the latter. 

It didn't seem like it because there weren't many leads to hold and the number of sheer innings thrown by the pen meant a lot of bad innings were seen as well. But look at the stats and they don't lie. Tanner Rainey, around injury, was ok.  Erasmo Ramirez, completely usable. Kyle Finnegan, a good team would put him out there. Carl Edwards Jr. decent reliable veteran arm near the back of a pen.  Paolo Espino, solid work as a reliever. Andres Machado, you can find a place for him. Victor Arano, anyone's last pen arm. Mason Thompson, young guy with stuff who can also get the job mostly done. 

None of these guys were great. It's hard to say that any of these guys were even good. But none were terrible and being able to go to the pen, pull any arm and have it be a major league arm.  That has some value. In fact it has completely average value as the stats will tell you. 

That's not to say there wasn't a bright spot. No not Doolittle who was good until hurt but that was like 5 innings. My boy Hunter Harvey.  Former first round pick (love guys with "credentials"), son of a very good closer (love guys with "genes") who struck out a ton, didn't walk many and was hard to hit (above all love guys that actually pitch great).  

There were also dim spots Sam Clay, Patrick Murphy; but these guys are so fungible it didn't matter. All in all the pen was ok.  Take your small victories. 

Presumed Plan : The Nats add one or two veteran arms on minor league contracts just to see. Rainey remains closer with some combo of Thompson and Harvey being the back end. 

Reasons for Presumed Plan : They like Rainey and even injured he didn't pitch poorly enough to flat out lose the job although you could argue Harvey won it. They like Thompson as well and he flashed some decent signs while being ok so there's your three. 

As for the signings - the pen is devoid of top end talents so signing a guy that used to be good two years ago for nothing to see if you can catch lightning in a bottle makes sense. But I'll be shocked if it's anyone good for more than a year. 

My thoughts : Pens bounce around because of those small numbers of innings pitched. So normally I wouldn't be on the pen being ok again but nothing here was extraordinary.  It was a bunch of guys with 4.00-4.50 ERA arms who threw to that. So I think they can repeat being ok. Low bar I know. 

I think Harvey should get to close because while I think Rainey is a keeper, he's not good. Now of course this goes against optimal use of Harvey, but really who cares when the Nats are looking at a 6- win ceiling. Make the best arm your closer, and let the fans be happy to see him get called to the mound. Play some wacky song. Something! 

I don't think it matters if the Nats don't sign a good relief arm given what I expect them to do everywhere else. If any position is a "throw young guys at it and see what happens" it's this one so even though they only have garbage young guys - whatever. However given how bad the rotation expects to be and how Espino didn't handle the longer relief role, I thinking signing a "true" long reliever would be a good idea. A 5.00 ERA pitcher, or better yet a 4.50 ERA guy who can't stay healthy starting to throw 100 innings behind the lousy staff. Ryan Yarborough. There you go Rizzo, did your job for you.