Earnest on Gallo

Joey Gallo is going to be a National.  1 year, 5 million.  He'll likely play both 1B and the OF as needed. 

A quick primer on Joey Gallo. A decade or so ago Gallo was a top prospect, A top 10 guy who hit 42 homers and walked almost 90 times across 126 games of A+ and AA ball as a 20 year old. That's prodigious power for a prospect and great patience. He'd put up a .300/.400/.600 line in AA the following year and looked to be a superstar despite a .193 batting average in AAA and a very high K/9 rate at every level.  He adapted to every other jump quickly, surely he would again. But he did not and he has spent his major league career balancing out that power and those Ks and lack of contact in general into something decidedly average production wise at the plate. But you could pair that oddly average bat with a pretty good glove. Guys with his hitting profile are usually oafs. Think Adam Dunn or Kyle Schwarber. But Gallo was a decent OF with a great arm. Great instincts for the game, decent speed (though not a base stealer by any means)

But that was then.  What about now? What about 2024? 

Everything is a bit worse. He's been hurt more and more often playing 120 and 110 games the past two years. His average, acceptable in the .205-.210 range has now settled into the below .180. His fielding instincts can no longer compensate for a aging and hurt body and he's better off staying at 1B.  He is still producing enough power to make his bat worthwhile but in a way that you find guys 6-8 years older doing it; find a mistake and try to get around fast and crush it over the fence. His homer profile reads like that of Evan Longoria and Matt Carpenter. In 2022 his power dipped a little and he was flat bad. Last year it perked back up and he was back around average. Overall it reads both as "ok right now" and flashing red danger lights. 

But you can see how this move makes sense for the Nats in a number of ways, or at least you could this afternoon... we'll get to that. 

Gallo is a lefty bat. The Nats need a lefty bat.  Gallo has power. The Nats need power. Gallo can play 1B or DH or corner OF.  The Nats could use a guy at any and all of those positions to start the year. He's a player that fits. There's also value in the idea of mixing up the lineup for a pitcher. The Nats are full of high contact low power hitters. Gallo is something different to face and that change can matter in a line-up. He also represents no long term outlay of money. If the Nats want to move on from him this year it will be easy to do. 

Ok but then... Rhys Hoskins is all this too except, you know, good. No he isn't 5 million for 1, he's 34 million for 2. But everything here he does better. No he doesn't have the same power but he'll hit for more contact and will put more balls over the fence through that. He fields 1B well. And the contract he is looking to sign means the Nats can move on from him fairly easily and with contracts coming off after 2024 they'd still be able to sign guys going into 2025. The difference between the two is simply money. 

But that's back to another argument about what an increasing number of fans want them to do. It's still not what they HAVE to do. Not yet. That's not what 2024 is about really. Frustration may grow but remind yourself it's about 2025. Feel free to scream then but try to hold for one more year.

As a 2024 signing itself though I still don't like the Gallo signing. The chances of getting nothing are simply too high for me and the team can't afford to get nothing from their FA signings if they want to not be terrible.

Monday Quickie - still nothing

I guess old Nats friend Hader signed. But going to the AL really doesn't mean much for the Nats. 

Otherwise it remains quiet. For a team trying to wait things out both very quick, which can create a feeling like the last players remaining have to be snapped up NOW, and very slow, which can make your strategy interfere with preparation time by the player, are not good.  I'd say we're approaching very slow, but I'd also say that's probably better than very fast. The Nats might have to bite earlier before the best deals are uncovered but they should still be able to use a slow market to keep costs down in general. 

If they are going to sign someone. 

Last week on Twitter I got into a little back and forth with someone who felt we were being too down on the 2024 Nats. So what if they don't do anything? The game plan was never for 2024 it was for 2025. It was for the young guys up now; Ruiz, Garcia, Abrams, Gray, Gore PLUS the young guys to come who aren't here yet;  Wood, Crews, House, Cavalli. We might see them this year but they won't likely be impacting any races.

That's mostly correct and I do, in my cold steel heart, agree. Whatever happens this year we have to wait until we see what the team looks like on Opening Day 2025 before we make any judgments. It doesn't matter how or how fast they get to legitimate Wild Card contention, just that they do. And there was never a case for that in 2024 unless you were really optimistic. 

BUT 

But there is a case for wanting to see the team show they are going to move when the time is right. That is part of what the Werth signing was. We plan to compete. Without that you can envision a scenario where the kids don't progress as hoped and they scrap 2025 and maybe more. They aren't planning to compete right now so maybe, unlike last time, they are fine not doing that for a while. 

And there is also a case for not wanting to watch a miserable team again. The Nats won 71 games last year and were lucky to win that. They are probably a little worse than last year right now.  Does anyone want to watch a 65-70 win team again? Does the idea "well there's a good chance they should be better in 2025" make it more palatable? Nats fans have now suffered through 4 lousy years of baseball. One more would match what went on when they got the team, but without the shine of a new team and then a new park. The World Series helps keep it from a riot situation but patience, from what I can tell is wearing thin. 

This remains conjecture and speculation until we get to 2025 but I think we'd all rather feel like they are going to try than wonder if they are going to try. Right now Nats fans are in the latter group.

What about Wood, House, and Cavalli?

Yesterday we talked about Crews (well not really - more honestly we talked very briefly about rankings and psychology) and you can go back and read that. But the Nats did have four other guys on these Top 100 lists. Let's talk about them

James Wood : I guessed he'd fall out of the Top 10 and he did in one place not the other. It will be close in MLB's list and likely not close (easily IN the Top 10) in Fangraphs, but we'll see. Still the takeaway is He's a Top 15+ ish player. Why in general is everyone still so high on James? 

Take a look at this. 

For those too lazy to click it's the Eastern League leaders in HRs.  James is not 1, he's tied for 6th but that's not the only number to look at.  What's also interesting is the PA and Age.  Out of the Top 29 (those with 13 or more homers). James is only 21st in PA and he's the 2nd youngest player here. So no, he's not generating the power of say Tyler Hardman or Luke Ritter or Ben Rice (hey two Yankees!) but those guys are 24, 26, and 24 respectively (awwww, well at least the Yankees are the 24yos). Wood has far more promise to improve. Guys slightly older like Colt Keith and Coby Mayo also generate more power but here's where things not in these numbers kick in. Those are both oafish types that the teams are hoping can stick at 3rd instead of being forced into a 1B/DH role*. Wood is an overall talent with the potential to stick in centerfield.  To bring it back to the Yankees, think Aaron Judge. If you ever watch him play OF he's so much better than you'd think given his size. Wood is like that. Wood is also, if not a better fielder, just faster giving him a weapon on the basepaths if teams choose to use it. 

That's a TON of good. What's the catch that keeps him from being a Top 5 guy? It's the 39 walks and 124 Ks. That's not the worst walk rate, but it's not a plus and that K rate is pretty bad. So that hangs over him in the "is he going to be a useful all-over Dave Kingman, which would still be very good, or something really special" way. We probably won't know though until he gets to the majors because nothing but the Ks are holding him back and they aren't holding him back that much. You want to see what this kid can do right now.

Brady House : I thought he'd move up a bunch and he barely budged.  Well I was wrong here because he was barely budging from MID-SEASON 2023 lists. He had fallen off 2023 lists entirely at the start because of his mostly injury related issues in 2022 and jumped back on based on what he had done starting 2023. It's easy to forget because he's been around longer but he's even younger than Wood, who turned 21 at the tail end of last season, and will play nearly half of this year as a 20 year old. He hit at every level he played in last year (A, A+, AA) showing himself to have .300+ potential.

But his K-rate and BB-rate in AA resembled Woods. And unlike Wood he's not the greatest talent. The raw power is not there. He was a usable at SS but everything (size, speed) was saying move him to 3B to take advantage of his plus plus arm**.  This knocks him down a couple pegs. The ceiling for House would still be "All-Star" but the ceiling on Wood is "all-timer". Note please I'm saying "ceiling" here. Don't get ahead of yourselves.

Cade Cavalli : basically he's here because he was here last year and got hurt? I have to think MLB will drop him out. I get why they all liked him going into last year. Very solid AAA numbers. Really keeps the ball in the park. A bit wild with not as much Ks as you'd like to see but history shows potential for that to improve. A guy with a great chance to find a spot for a few years in a major league rotation. But getting hurt throws that all into question. Let's hope he bounces right back.

 

So while we curiously argue about Crews (and Skenes) currently not looking like the best-est in the draft class, don't get caught up with it too much. Crews should be good. Wood still looks like he should be good. House has potential to be good and should be usable. The offensive pieces are mostly there.  They have usable in Garcia and usable with potential in Abrams and usable with potential at the plate let's hope he's not a bust with the glove in Ruiz. This gives them a very solid core. Even if none hit high you can buy a couple of very productive bats*** and this is a very good offense, or you can probably just play it out with what you'll have in a couple years and be close to average.  That's not a guarantee - you can look at the 2023 Tigers to see a "made reasonable choices, developed ok, but didn't work out enough" scenario on offense - but I can't make a complaint of how the Nats set themselves up at the plate here. 

 

*Mayo especially because his arm is a rocket.   

**To re-emphasize Mayo's arm here, everyone loves House's arm. Mayo's is seen as better. Like literally maybe the best arm in the minors. But House fields better and it don't matter how good that arm is if you aren't getting to enough balls. 

*** Now can you do that AND buy arms? Because they'll NEED to buy arms. 

Am I tired of being right? No.

Baseball America released it's Top 100 AND....

Wyatt Langford #4

Dylan Crews #6

Paul Skenes #9 

So yes, as I said Langford DID leap over Crews and Skenes (but they all remain great prospects and everything could change again by Memorial Day). Skenes dropped a bit more than I thought but just a bit (I wouldn't have guessed under #7) 

Also Wood did drop out of the Top 10, as I also said, but only to #11 not 15-20 like I guessed. So only a minor win there. 

House... stayed stable in the 50s?  I find that very odd for a 20 year old that hit well in AA but there's probably a bit of "burned me once" mixed in here from people that got real high on him after 2019. 

Hassell's injuries cost him his spot in the Top 100. Certainly reasonable until he shows he's back to what he was.  Green also dropped out but I told you last year that was a "don't want to miss out on the 5 tool guy everyone is taking a flier on" rating, not actual "potential baseball player" rating. 

Look I'm not saying I'm a good talent evaluator. I have no idea. But I do like to think I'm a good evaluator of the evaluators - how they think, what factors OTHER than actual skill and potential causes them to ranks guys like they do. I think this shows I'm not crazy there. 

FWIW - Wood didn't drop out of BPs top 10. They've always been much higher on Wood (had him at #15 going into last year to BAs 39, had him at #3 post draft last year) so that's not surprising. MLB, the third of the ones I look at is in between so we'll see. Based on this he might still be in there. Fangraphs too LOVES Wood (he was still their 2 at the end of the year) so I'm guessing he does stay in their top 10.

BA - Langford 4 Crews 6 Skenes 9 Wood 11 House 55

BP - Langford 2 Crews 5 Skenes 9 Wood 7 House 69 Cavalli 85

Monday Quickie - Int'l Signing Day

Here's a quick primer on International Signing Day, or at least my take on it. It boils down to are you signing one of the top 5ish prospects? Good! Might not work out but you are trying. Are you not? Bad! But maybe you'll be the one of two/three teams that gets lucky this year and finds a diamond in the rough. 

Did the Nats sing a top name? Nope. Not particularly close either. Top 25 sounds good but feel free to peruse old Top international lists. It really isn't. FWIW people do like Victor Hurtado in the "really young but really could be something" way so I'm not saying the Nats did the absolute minimum. But much like one would think looking at the major league team, there could be more done here.

So the Nats are one of 27 or so teams hoping to get lucky. I wish them well. 

What else is there to talk about?  NOTHING.  The FA list has shifted a little in two weeks

1B/DH : Carlos Santana, JD Martinez, Brandon Belt, Jorge Soler, Donovan Solano, Garrett Cooper

Others with DH potential :  Justin Turner, Tommy Pham, Adam Duvall, Aaron Hicks

Starters : Lorenzen, Clevinger, Kluber, Carrasco,Wood

The starters have been cut in half but the bats are close to the same. If you are worried about the Nats missing out on the chance for a bat that can help, that's probably only going to happen if they don't want to sign something like that. Martinez has interest and likely won't be a Nat but it's pretty quiet on the others. 

Of course most would argue they need a dependable starter more, especially to bridge into 2025 when no-good innings eaters Corbin and Williams will go. So focus on those names I guess. This market might remain set until Montgomery and Snell go and trigger teams moving to back-up plans. But guys seem pretty eager at this point considering they keep signing. These types aren't waiting around to be the guy without a chair. The Nats could get them if they wanted to, but it doesn't appear to be a priority. 

Of course, of course, I'm still just speculating and I'd tell you if you said the above to wait until mid Feburary or so. It FEELS like the Nats are just floating along and not trying, but we don't know and we won't know for sure until guys start heading to Florida. It's boring right now, but that doesn't mean it's bad. It's just boring and we make it out to be bad.

Still , if more doesn't happen soon I'll have to write about something else here.  The weather? It's cold and rainy here. I hear DC is getting snow. I like snow.

Keibert Ruiz - The only National

That might be saying a bit much but I'm going to list the Nationals under contract for 2025. 

• Stephen Strasburg
• Keibert Ruiz

That's it. The Nats have plenty of guys under control but exactly zero of them have the Nats made a longer term commitment to.  Not saying they should have just noting what is going on. 

Keibert had an down and up year last year at the plate. The guy we saw in the first half, particularly from May on simply should not be a starter in the major leagues.  The guy we saw in the second half might be the best hitting catcher in baseball. Yes, it's not a great list but still he had the same OPS in the 2nd half as Rutschman had for the year.  

For a young player, and Keibert is still young, this matters. It might mean he's learning something. Ruiz is always swinging and always making contact so the type of contact he makes matters and he's the best it seems when he's leaning into his strengths. From the right side that means keeping the ball down and getting hits. From the left that means getting the ball up. From both sides it seems like he did his best when he was a little more selective but really getting ahead of the pitches and pulling them. Not hitting them any harder mind you.  So what is going on?  Just a guess but by pulling it I imagine there is a split second less time for infielders to react on the right side, a few feet closer to the fence from the left side. Normally that might not make a big difference but when you are constantly putting the ball in play like Keibert, that adds up more.

That is it with Ruiz. He's not going to strike out so he just needs to get as many solid bats on balls as possible. Very few hit the ball as correctly as Ruiz but also nearly all the league hits it harder.  It's a weird combo being able to square the ball up really well but with nothing behind it. 

I'm rambling.  The point is 2nd half Ruiz did hit the ball differently so there's a possibility that 2nd half offensive Ruiz could continue.  And that's important as he's not a great fielder (might be terrible) and he's the only guy the Nats are counting on right now. When you make only one move that move better be a good one.

So who do you NOT want?

I thought about doing a post about who the Nats should get but the honest truth is that would breakdown pretty easily into "best available player" arguments. While that's fun and all there's only so many ways to say Rhys Hoskins and Blake Snell. And what is the point arguing about guys there is close to 0% chance the Nats will get? 

Instead we'll play another game - who do you NOT want. From the players listed below still in play, who would you LEAST like to see on the Nats next year.  It can be for any reason, talent, personality, fit, injury history, personal grudge, what have you.  I've added in ages and last years stats for quick reference. I'll note that for a few it might be worth it to look at 2022 too. Like Kluber and Carrasco, obviously bad standouts last year, had healthy and good 2022s. You can still not want them because of the age, but there is a reason they are on this list to start.

1B/DH 

Carlos Santana (38) 146G .240 / .318 / .429  23 HR

JD Martinez (36) 113G  .271 / .321 / .572  33HR

Brandon Belt (35) 103G  .254 / .369 / .490  19HR

Jorge Soler (32) 137G  .250 / .341 / .512  36 HR

Donovan Solano (36) 134G  .282 / .369 / .391  5HR

Garrett Cooper (33) 123G  .251 / .304 / .419  17HR

Others with DH potential

Justin Turner (39) 146G  .276 / .345 / .455  23HR

Tommy Pham (36) 129G  .256 / .328 / .446  16HR

Adam Duvall (35) 92G  .247 / .303 / .531  21HR

Aaron Hicks (34) 93G .253 / .353 / .383  8HR

Starters

Marcus Stroman (33) 27G 3.95 ERA  3.58 FIP  7.8 K/9  3.4 BB/9

Michael Lorenzen (32) 29G 4.18 ERA,  4.46 FIP,  6.5 K/9,  2.8 BB/9

Mike Clevinger (33) 24G 3.77 ERA, 4.28 FIP,  7.5 K/9, 2.7 BB/9

Corey Kluber (38) 15G (9 starts) 7.04 ERA, 7.11 FIP, 6.9 K/9, 3.4 BB/9

Carlos Carrasco (37) 20G 6.80 ERA, 5.86 FIP, 6.6 K/9, 3.8 BB/9

Sean Manaea (32)  37G (10 starts) 4.44 ERA, 3.90 FIP, 9.8 K/9, 3.2 BB/9

Alex Wood (33) 29G (12 starts) 4.33 ERA, 4.47 FIP, 6.8 K/9, 3.9 BB/9

I'll start.  My heart doesn't want Hicks. This is because what appeared to happen with the Yankees when he didn't handle not performing well.  He got hurt, he got booed, and either he pressed or got depressed or something and he never got on track again despite being talented (as seen in his brief Baltimore stint).  For a team that needs senior leadership, it's not quite what I'm looking for, though by all accounts he is a great guy and teammate. It's just the on field example that's troublesome. Not a bad attitude but something doesn't work here in adverse situations.  Add to that the fact the Nats need power and he's one of the few options without it, it's a pass for me. 

I also don't like dumb long hair. Long hair is ok.  Manaea's got locks.  Lorenzen (who did cut it) had a passable length of wavy hair but Clevinger? Not working for me.  Don't want to see that every 5th day unless you are an ace and you can get away with whatever you want.

Tuesday Quickie - 2024 Year of the Nationals!

Taking an extended holiday break is nice. I did it and so, in fact, did the Washington Nationals. After signing first round flop Nick Senzel and buy low comeback potential reliever Dylan Floro, Mike Rizzo put on his Tommy Bahama flew down ironically to Bermuda and sipped on a Mai Tai for three weeks. They've singed only minor league depth since then and only a few of those. 

But again that's the plan as we understand now. It is not a "strategic signing to set up the team for 2025" off-season.  It is a "wait and see what bargains we can get because we don't know when we'll be good" off-season. Much like it was going into last year. Signings will come, they almost have to unless they are resigning themselves to a worse finish, but they will come later when the pool becomes shallower but the demand for water has also diminished.  Talent should still be there but at better prices. 

For reference here's the list of ok FAs that might end up on the Nats, updated for signings.

1B/DH : Carlos Santana, JD Martinez, Brandon Belt, Jorge Soler, Donovan Solano, Garrett Cooper, Cutch

Others with DH potential :  Mitch Garver, Justin Turner, Tommy Pham, Adam Duvall, Aaron Hicks

Starters : Stroman, Martin Perez, Giolito, Lorenzen, Clevinger, Kluber, Carrasco, Manaea, Montas, Wood

Still plenty of help available. So do something! (I'm talking to the other teams here because they have to make their run before the Nats swoop in).

2023 was a mild downer. The team stunk, though not as badly as it could have. The prospects in house didn't explode, though enough made progress to keep the plan on track. On quick analysis, the draft didn't get the best guy*, though there's nothing at all wrong with Crews as a 2. 

2024 though? Year of the Nationals! Until it isn't but that isn't today.

*Basically all post-draft work says Wyatt Langford, picked #4 by the Rangers, clearly looks to be the best and I'd be shocked if he doesn't leapfrog Skenes and Crews in prospect lists this Spring. Yes, it's early but you'd rather be the best early too!

Monday Quickie - Not much going on

Who here likes Spencer Watkins and Bellinger rumors to nowhere? 

Hmm, no one. I see.

As we round the corner into 2024 but the Nats FA play was always likely to be like this. Patience first, grab needs late for better prices. Since the options for the Nats are rather large they can't be shut out. They merely lose 1st or 2nd choices and have to go with 5th or 6th.  It's not dumpster diving.  Well Watkins was, but that's not what I see these other FAs to be.  It's bargain store shopping. Antiquing.

Currently still available (that's a possible get)

1B/DH : Carlos Santana, JD Martinez, Brandon Belt, Jorge Soler, Donovan Solano, Garrett Cooper, Cutch

Others with DH potential :  Mitch Garver, Justin Turner, Tommy Pham, Adam Duvall, Aaron Hicks

Starters : Stroman, Martin Perez, Giolito, Lorenzen, Clevinger, Kluber, Carrasco, Manaea, Montas, Wood

and like 20 guys who can throw to an average RP level.

What none of these really are are guys that say "Ok cornerstone for 2024-X" but they are players that would make the team better. Guys who signed late (after like mid Feb when camps open) last year include Donovan Solano, Matt Moore, Michael Wacha, and Micahel Fulmer. It's possible. 

But on the flipside most of the guys that did sign late were bad.  Talent will be there but the Nats need to ID it. Last year the Nats' late signings were Chad Kuhl and org depth that never made it to the majors.  The year before that they were far more aggressive and nailed several RP :  Carl Edwards Jr,  Sean Doolittle (in theory), Erasmo Ramirez, event Steve Cishek wasn't terrible; but coming up blank on bargain SP and big time FA, Anibal Sanchez, Aaron Sanchez, Nelson Cruz.

We'll keep these above lists as running tallies. Guys are still out there. They will still be out there after the holidays. They may still be out there into February. If the Nats are going to try to be smart, we can hold it against them if they are not.

Off-Season Position Discussion : Relief Pitching

Was the Nats bullpen good or bad last year?  Quick. Guess. 

It was bad posting the 4th worst ERA in baseball.

The Nats best relievers put up some ok ERAs.  Hunter Harvey (MY BOY!) was clearly the best of the lot throwing to a 2.82 ERA, but Kyle Finnegan and Jordan Weems had perfectly ok ERAs in the high mid 3.00s. And Carl Edwards Jr was doing around the same before his injury limited him to 30 innings this year.  But outside of this there was almost nothing to look to. The Nats had a lot of bad relievers pitch for them last year. Mason Thompson, Andres Machado, and Cory Abbott threw the 4th, 5th, and 6th most innings for relievers and had 5.50, 5.22, and 6.64 ERAs respectively. Ten other guys were given innings in relief and only 1 (Robert Garcia) had an ERA under 4.76.  Only three were under 6.33.

The good news is the rotation didn't ask for that many innings. so this was no worse than it had to be, but this lack of depth presents a problem to fix for 2024.  You expect your pen to have issues. That's true for every team.  You don't expect to get into questionable areas on your 4th best arm and stock 2-3 unusable arms at any time.

The Nats have started to bridge this gap by signing Dylan Floro.  He's a guy whose stats (good control, never gives up homers, decent K rate, but does get hit) suggest a better ERA than he had last year. Yes, he gives up hits and it's not that fluky. He doesn't induce a lot of soft contact. But he does keep the ball on the ground and a .401 BABIP like he had last year is kind of crazy and unlikely to be repeated. The takeaway is the contact makes him a questionable mid-inning reliever to stop the bleeding but a decent arm to start a frame. It's not a bad gamble that he'll be something like a mid 3.00s ERA guy.

Presumed Plan : The Nats sign Dylan Floro.  NAILED IT! 

The Nats sign some cheaper guys to fill in that gap, but don't commit to that back end stopper.  Floro is one. There will probably be a number two. Anything beyond that is likely to be chaff. Minor league contract guys that they bring in because they are available for org depth.

Reasoning behind Presumed Plan : Relief pitching is usually the last thing a team addresses. This is because the cost for value is bad here and it's not that hard to find a decent arm that can throw one inning from a teams stockpile.  If you aren't competing or just about to, you let it slide and hope cheap internal alternatives show themselves. 

The Nats are not competing in 2024. 

But they won't do nothing because the bullpen was really half-terrible leaving them one injury away from disaster. Rainey coming back is good. Floro coming in is good. But the way they are talking they need at least one more Floro type. 

My Take :  Finnegan and Weems were not ok. I think they know this but they don't care. Hell they are selling Zuckerman on the fact that Machado was good when you have to parse it like "from August through mid September" to actually see that.  So this is why I have them only making one more signing even though it leaves them with a pen that is:

Harvey : Good! 

Rainey : Maybe Good but coming back from injury

Floro : Maybe good / Maybe Not good

Finnegan : Maybe good but a sneaky bad last year.

Weems : Probably Not Good

Machado : Probably Not Good

??? 

If their next signing slotted in above or after Harvey then fine, but you know it's going to be either a guy that might be good but has something against him or a guy that probably won't be good but not as terrible as the guys here.

So I think they are going to end up one arm short of a serviceable pen which leaves them at the mercy of injuries and crashes. If they had a deeper organizational depth at the position I might understand it but they don't - at least not for 2024.

But I guess I did say it would be the last thing a team looks to fix and the Nats aren't there yet so this is pretty much on schedule if a bit disappointing. 

And that's probably a take away from this entire position by position review. The Nats aren't there yet. They know it. Their moves for 2024 will reflect that and what they think about their chances for 2025. So far these still aren't moves to set up a winner, which means they are not bullish on 2025. Which means YOU shouldn't be bullish on 2025. At least right now.

The off-season is young though. Maybe they'll surprise us. And really it's not the Nats organization now that you should really want to surprise you, it's the Nats young players in the summer of 2025.

Nick Senzel - Quick Thoughts

Not good but cheap so whatever.

The Good: 

Nick was a extremely well-thought of player coming out of college and ended up being drafted 2nd.  He was able to hit for high average through the minors before his final promotion

Nick was able to handle CF in his youth and seems to be an ok corner OF. 

The Bad : 

Nick never developed the power it was thought he would. Because they had no fear of the big hit major league pitchers didn't have to pitch around him and his decent eye was made useless.  He was left with only his contact skills but he can't make it translate into high average. 

Nick doesn't seem to be able to handle CF anymore and was always a questionable IF.  

Basically it's kicking the tires on a player to see if he really just didn't mesh with the Reds.  He's a high contact guy but the Nats are oddly full of such players and really need power. I don't like the signing but again it's cheap so as long as the Nats don't feel committed to him it's a nothing move.

Off-Season Position Discussion : Starting Pitching

In 2023 the Nats went ahead with a four pronged pitching plan

Prong 1 : Let Corbin cook. He's getting paid too much to get rid of. The Nats need innings.  Just throw him out there every 5th day. As far as the goals were set, this worked.  Corbin was bad, but not bad enough to be too bad for a bad team's rotation. He threw 30 more innings that last year and pitched to a less horrific ERA than either 2021 or 2022. 

Prong 2 : Give Trevor Williams the chance to start and trade him if he's any good. This is where the two-year deal was supposed to help bring dividends enticing other teams with another cheap year of good pitching. This one totally didn't work as Williams took the mantle as the Nats worst everyday starter - not an easy thing to do when everyone is throwing to an FIP close to 5.00.  

Prong 3 : Let the kids loose. Gray and Gore were allowed to be basically full time starters with the hope they would blossom.  They did not. Gray looked like he might and he really did cut down on the homers this season. Unfortunately at the cost of everything else. It would sort of catch up with him at the end of the year but good luck got him an AS appearance and a lower than deserved ERA.  Gore pitched better but it's hard to say the Nats were happy with the results which were firmly middle of the road. No aces here yet. 

Prong 4 : ???? The Nats originally went with Chad Kuhl who was too terrible to stick around.  Joan Adon was also given his 19th try at being a starter only to fail again*. They ended up landing on Jake Irvin who was usable.  He was a throw back to the bad old days when you'd see Tim Redding or Jason Bergmann and say "that wasn't too bad" and accept it because there were bigger problems. But he was perfectly ok for a bad team's rotation.

The Nats had one big loss, Williams' disappointment leading to no trade, and no big surprises. Young teams hope for big surprises so overall this was a bad season for the starting staff, even if it was pretty much as expected given the talent

Presumed Plan : 

Same prongs, different season. The big difference will be that there is a line of "ok, I'd like to see that guy get some time" types in the minors who should (will?) be given chances if they shine in the lower ranks.  Rutledge, Henry, Parker, Herz, Saenz.   

Reasoning behind Presumed Plan : The contracts say Corbin and Williams are here. The plan says Gore and Gray are here. The fifth spot will remain a ? with Jake Irvin given the first shot but the goal of 2024 is setting up 2025 and Irvin, William, maybe even Corbin should be on short leashes because they need to find good pitchers fast. If they don't find them internally they'll have to pay for them. 

Why won't they pay for them?  Because they are still working out if 2025 is going to be a run at bigger and better things or if this rebuild is a washout.

My Take : Sign a good pitcher. Let Williams and Corbin go. 

This is about the future clear and simple now.  Neither of these two guys is about that.  So why are they here?  To eat innings? To save relievers?  If you bring in a guy to take their place and he isn't managing to do those things, replace him with another.  It might be tough. You might find no one. But it makes more sense than sending these two out for 40% of the games through the end of July. 

As for the good pitcher.  There are a couple top notch guys they won't get in Yamamoto and Snell. I'd totally make a sell the farm run at Yamomoto but chances are everyone else will.  So what's the other choice?  I suppose Jordan Mongomery and security.  He'll still cost a pretty penny but he'll give you the performance you need. Will it be another Corbin contract? Yeah something like that but because he's not coming off his best year he'll cost a little cheaper. Look you have to take chances. The Corbin deal didn't work out long term but it did give them a title.  With no playoffs to stretch Jordan's arm he could expect to be a little more durable. 

As for Gore and Gray - they start. You hope they get better. There isn't much more than that to say. For each guy I mentioned as an up and comer, these two had more impressive resumes.  If they can from a solid 2-3-4 combo the Nats can work around that, finding/signing an ace and another mid-rotation guy from what's at hand. They are more in the 3-4-5 range. I'm more of a Gore fan than Gray (better stats and prospect evaluation) but always willing to give Gray the benefit of turning the corner when he looks good. I'm a sucker. What happens if they don't get any better?  I'm not sure. They probably still both remain in the rotation but it's hard to envision a playoff rotation forming in this situation. It will take a big commitment (re: $$$$)

*To be fair to Joan he really isn't much worse that any of the guys that started but with bad luck and no pedigree. 

Off-Season Position Discussion : Outfield

There was no area of the Nats team more unsettled than OF last year, specifically CF and LF.  (Oh ok, middle relief pitching but that's par for course for any baseball team.) While Thomas manned RF for 148 games* doing both better at the plate and worse in the field than expected, the others had no stability.  

Oh they tried in CF, forcing Alex Call into the position for almost half the season after Robles got hurt. But Call was so bad with the bat (.200/ .307 / .307) that the Nats couldn't keep doing that. So they played Jacob Young (not good), Derek Hill (very bad) and even Lane Thomas (shouldn't be there) but found no answers.  

LF was even harder though there they might have found something in Stone Garrett.  Hitting .269 / .343 / .457 with decent defense it seemed like the Nats found themselves another dia... well tasteful piece of jewelry in the rough. But Garrett broke his leg and much like CF the other options tried all year; Dickerson, Call, Alu, Rutherford, Blakenhorn, and Vargas, didn't stick.

 But that's ok right? Because if the Nats have anything it's young OFers in the minors . Draft pick Dylan Crews, traded for players James Wood and Robert Hassell, random guys they liked before like Jeremy De La Rosa, or like more now like Daylen Lile.  The solution wasn't expected to be found in 2023.

Presumed Plan : 

Huh. Well Thomas will play RF. That's given. If we assume his poor D was more a fluke of yearly defensive stats (more likely) than a downward trend (less likely) he will be fine if not the Werth like figure they'd love to make him into. They've brought back Robles so he will probably be in CF, if only to play out the string on his Nats career. LF will be Stone Garrett if he's healthy. If not... I guess a random OF FA would be the choice. Something meh usually shakes out for cheap. 

Alex Call, who they love more than life itself, can play defense so probably sticks on the roster as the 4th OF.   

Reasoning behind Presumed Plan : 

OF is the Nats position of the future and they fully expect to have at least one young guy if not two starting on OD 2025, so they aren't going to pony up for a long term OF signing. Thomas is fine. Garrett would be fine. Robles seems to be the guy they can't quit but also can't fix.  As I noted they love Call and a defense first 4th OF makes sense as Thomas didn't look very good and Robles is probably the shakiest of the guys to hold their position.  

That's, of course, if Garrett is healthy. He may not be and if that's the case look for the Nats in late January early February to scour the OF market for the best cheapest option because, like I said, there isn't much reason to put money here when your prayers are you are starting a rookie here in July. This is a spot to save money for the team where fans can't really go after them because the plan is clear. They are going to take advantage of that.

My Take :  

Another holding pattern year isn't exciting but it's what the team needs to do. Of course they could go big but doing that at 1B or DH makes more sense than OF and as we keep saying SP is the one they really should do this for. I would have released Robles, better for him and the Nats, but GMs hate to lose and if someone else got Robles to be good (a distinct possibility in my eyes) Rizzo would flip. With Robles here you play him and you of course play Thomas who isn't as good as he's made out to be but he's a perfectly cromulent 3rd OF. 

LF is a question that Garrett answers well enough.  If he doesn't heal fast enough though I worry that the Nats will slap Call in there and "call it a day" (Ha!) and that will be bad. They should at least take a chance on someone else at this point. Because it would be very cheap to do so, I have them doing just that and there are going to be guys out there that won't hurt the team. Get a win or two better for a million bucks. It'll be worth it 

 *second most? Garrett and Call each played RF for 5 games. 

Off-Season Position Discussion : Third Base

Third base worked exactly as the Nats wanted last year. They brought in a (probably) good player who had an off 2022 in the offseason in Jeimer Candelario on a short term deal. He performed very well, bordering on an All-Star season, and at the trade deadline brought back something of interest in a young live arm DJ Herz. 

Meanwhile with the arrival of CJ Abrams Brady House shifted over to 3B and had a renaissance at the plate after a disappointing injury marred 2022*. His AA work doesn't demand an immediate promotion and he's likely to start there in 2024, but AAA is also possible and the understanding is if he's as good this year, he'll start getting major league reps later in 2024. 

So the past was fine, but it's past. The future looks set up, but it's the future.  What is the now?

Presumed Plan : Your guess is as good as mine but I'll say Vargas and Alu and maybe Kieboom or Darren Baker later, spinning tires waiting on House to arrive and if not House than a rocketing Yohandy or a surprise again Lipscomb.

Reasoning behind Presumed Plan : Vargas and Alu are on the 40 man still. There's my reasoning. I think the Nats are looking to spend some money but FA SP has to be goal 1 and 1B or maybe a big bat DH/OF would make more sense than a 3B when really what they want for 2024 is House to be great in AA/AAA and force their hand to bring him up. 

Their remains a possibility of signing a 3B guy I guess as the guys available (Candelario, Chapman, Urshela) combine D and O in a way that makes them more valuable then what they'll probably get. But I think it's a long shot because of the needs noted.  Nats aren't really in "get cute to try to get value" mode, or at least shouldn't be. 

My Take :  

Yeah. 

If the Nats have made a commitment to try something at 1B (which the DFA of Smith suggests) then trying something at 3B doesn't make much sense. I suppose you could shift any of those guys to 1B, the Cubs did that to Candelario, if House is ready quick or even if he isn't and you just want to, but then that value you got at 3B that took into account their defense is lessened. 

So you do nothing. 

Well maybe not. You could try to recreate 2023 in that you sign a guy with comeback potential and turn that into another live arm type.  Is there another target like this? Brian Anderson or Joey Wendle, two decent defenders with offensive success in the past might work but the offensive success is futher off and not as high as Jeimer's was. In fact when we look for just offense really no one has that potential sitting out there. They are all mostly several years older.  Man, what a smart move signing Candelario was. 

Out of what's out there - utility man Donovan Solano is a guy who doesn't need to come back as he's been hitting enough to stay good. Maybe the Nats can offer him a starting role that he can't get elsewhere.

Another vaugely interesting move could be signing Evan Longoria. You've got the "veteran leadership" GMs and coaches love and there's some sense he can still hit the lefties, so you could move him to DH. But he seems to be very much a Nelson Cruz risk a guy that will age out in 2024. 

There are no good moves here. Let it ride and focus on the SP and getting someone up here after the trade deadline to take their first stab at the majors.   

*In the sense they wanted House to rocket to the majors and he did not

Dom Smith gone but what's the plan

The Nats made a bunch of roster moves yesterday. 

Robles and Rainey were re-signed.  Rainey was pretty much a given. He doesn't cost much. The Nats have always really liked him. If he's really recovered from TJ (and most guys do) then he'll add to a decent back-end of the bullpen, a necessity for a team whose rotation is still a question mark. Robles was more of a question as the team and him have had a rocky relationship and he showed pretty well last year when healthy. But that last part is the key as Victor didn't play a game in the last 3 months of the year. While teams may have been interested it's unlikely they would have offered more than a minor league deal for Robles if he was out there. He probably could have had his pick of which team to end up with but the money was going to be better here. For the Nats he's a placeholder until the prospects are ready and even if he hits his potential he's likely done in DC after this season. 

In Alphabetical order Zach Brzykcy, Cole Henry, D.J. Herz, and Mitchell Parker were added to the 40-man to protect them from the Rule V.  These moves mostly make sense. Except for Henry these are all guys with really live arms and the Nats don't have a lot of those types. Herz and Parker are technically starters now but could be shifted to the pen at any point, especially for a year if selected in Rule V. Cole was a decently well thought of SP prospect and those guys always draw interest from pitching poor teams. Zach was probably the biggest stretch protecting - a pure reliever recovering from TJ who looked good in 2023 but in fairly limited innings - but you can still see it especially given the corresponding moves. 

Matt Cronin was move #1 a week or so ago. DFA'd because he's down with back surgery after being added himself to the 40man last year for Rule V protection.  He should be back in the minors as he works back. But the Nats needed three more spots.

Cory Abbott was one. At 28 and with a few tries in the majors showing little there isn't much reason to keep him around, although he might come back as AAA starter filler. Was one of those guys derailed by the pandemic. Not that he was going to be a star but he was asked to jump from AA where he was ok to AAA after the off-year because he was aging out of minors and couldn't do it. Probably too late for the guy to get the year of AA reset he needs especially given he wasn't thought of that highly to begin with. 

Andres Machado is just a guy. From the release he's looking at Japan where he can probably do ok and make a little more money than he would as a journeyman last man in the pen he'd be over here for a couple years. Nats need arms but arms like Machado are replaceable.

Now to the biggy -  Dominic Smith was designated for assignment. One one hand - this is good because Dom Smith was not really a positive player here. He wasn't the negative he seemed to be because he didn't hit homers. Overall he was meh. So the Nats can improve here. But as I noted in my post a while ago - the market for 1B isn't strong. The Nats can spend money here or they can get worse and I'm not 100% sure what the plan actually is. 

What I don't get is the interaction here with Meneses and presumably Riley Adams. Neither is good enough that they can't be pushed out of a position, even DH.  Neither is reliable enough that you can say you are going to get above average hitting from them in 2024. So forcing out Smith to go with some sort of Meneses/Adams/? rotation at 1B DH or even worse a set Meneses Adams duo would be asking for trouble. You are accepting worse defense, maybe terrible defense, for unclear gains at the plate from non-prospects. If this is the plan after Smith it's a terrible one. 

So that means looking at FA and if they are great. But as noted the market is Bellinger and Hoskins, with Santana and Candelario as back-up plans and then a lot of questions. The Nats don't need to commit to a question.

Dom is not a contending 1B in most scenarios. The Nats would have had to move on from him at some point. But if they move on from him laterally in 2024 I don't see the point. Do you really like Adams? Well then you let him DH! Joey is a 31 year old with questionable defense that had a below average bat this year. I don't know. This suggest something bigger and better but it also sets us up for a let down if they don't go for that.

Off-Season Position Discussion : Shortstop

The Nats have their shortstop of the future!

Of course last year we said the Nats have their second baseman of the future and that didn't exactly turn out as expected. While people are treating CJ Abrams as the answer, it's better said that he's a question that after 2023 you want to see played fully out. He has all the talent in the world and we saw it on display.  He was one of the major league leaders in stealing bases, swiping 47 bases while only being caught 4 times. He had one of the best ranges at SS in the game. He showed a nice increase in power hitting 11 homers after the All-Star Break among the leaders at his position.

And yet... 

He wasn't as effective a total baserunner, not showing great ability going from 1st to 3rd or scoring from 2nd.  He wasn't able to turn that range into more outs, still ending up in the lower ranks of fielders for his position. He didn't end up with a positive offensive year, unable to get that average up high enough and not currently capable of getting on base consistently through walks.

Behind him Vargas played some decent SS and wasn't awful at the plate. Mostly though he covered other positions as Adams covered the vast majority of playing time at short.

Presumed Plan : Abrams backed up by Vargas, with possibly House/Lipscomb/? getting playing time if there's an injury

Reasoning behind Presumed Plan : CJ Abrams is one of the main prospects gotten in the Soto trade. He can play SS.  He was ok last year overall and brought some excitement when he flashed the complete package in July. He gets another full year obviously with the idea being unless he tanks he's going to be playing SS for the Nats for a while.  

The Nats high minors situation at SS isn't very good. You've seen the Jeter Downseses and Lucius Foxeses. Vargas is here and capable and shouldn't be pushed as a back-up.  If something happens, as a 31yo journeyman, he also is easy enough to keep as a back-up and try something different over him, as noted in the presumed plan.

My Take :  

In Abrams, you have a player with the tools to be great. That's why he was a Top 10 prospect at one point. 

You also have a player with the reality of improving merely to be maybe average. That's why the Padres could part with him. 

But he did improve.  He cut down on his errors that made him a clear liability at SS. He increased his power taking his batting profile away from "does nothing good". He got more aggressive on the base paths utilizing that plus speed effectively. 

If he can improve just a little bit more in the field and at the plate, with his speed he'll be an above average player. If he can improve more than that he has star potential.  He probably won't ever be a complete player.  He's just not a natural fielder and he will likely never hit for average, but he could easily be a Lindor lite, hitting almost like Francisco and trading plus base-stealing for plus defense. That's worth less but still worth a fair amount.

Behind him Vargas played some decent SS and wasn't awful at the plate. A team looking to win it all would probably want something better. They'd want a player that could step in if there was an injury and overall be average.  Vargas isn't that. But he's going to play solid D, be able to be used at all the infield positions, and he shouldn't be an automatic out at the plate. That probably won't be the case much longer but for this level of team,  Vargas is a decent bench guy. 

So all in all I'm fine with the plan here too. The Nats are in "give young guys a lot of playing time" mode and Abrams is a perfect example of a guy you want to give more playing time to, without being an obvious good player. 

Off-Season Position Discussion : Second Base

2023 at second base did not go as the Nats wanted it to and yet it went exactly as should have been expected which makes the Nats reactions this year extremely curious.  After 2022, Luis Garcia had a lock on the position. He was average at the plate and while a disaster at SS, seemingly average in the field at 2B. He provided a cheap combo to not worry about moving forward. Just do that again and the Nats would be fine. Grow into a better player, a distinct possibility for a 22 year old, and the Nats would be very happy. 

Instead Garcia sort of floundered taking a step back both offensively and defensively. Instead of an average position it was a negative. To try to shake things up Garcia was sent down where he promptly didn't do much better. But the Nats talked about him trying harder and focusing and they brought him up again after a month. He didn't immediately do anything either but finished with a flourish, maybe being the Nats best hitter in the last two weeks. Motivation? Randomness? 

Another reason he was brought back up were the replacements for Garcia in his time off did little. Chavis and Vargas could field but neither could hit and Alu, in his limited time did neither. There were no quick solutions. 

But perhaps is there a long term one? Abrams took a step forward this year to a viable player and was once one of the top prospects in the game. He should hang onto SS. That means Brady House, who had a rebound year, moves to 3rd. If not guaranteed it seems likely that duo will be seen from the end of 2024 through 2025 as the Nats test the youth movement to its fullest. That means any other FA or minor leaguer now looks at 2B as their way in. Trey Lipscomb, hot for 2/3rds of 2023 then ice-cold? Fan favorite Not my favorite Jake Alu who made the least of two short major league opportunities? Super young riser Yohandy Morales? Try to force it one more time Carter Keiboom?  All have to be eyeing 2B.

Presumed Plan : 

Garcia starts at 2B. If he plays well he stays. If he doesn't the Nats start to rotate in anyone good on the 40 man

Reasoning behind Presumed Plan : 

A FA is pretty much out. 2B manned by a flawed 24 year old who was perfectly OK in 2022 is not where this team should focus. 

That leaves the minors to push Luis and while there are several players knocking on the door it's a soft knock a couple rooms away. There's no immediate push to Luis. With no one forcing the situation giving him another go at it makes sense. If someone suddenly bursts through the doors the Nats can re-evaluate then. 2024 is not a competitive year in the plans. 

My Take :  

Garcia seems like the next Robles. A guy with talent that's probably underperforming but who also is made a scapegoat by the Nats.  He should be allowed to make his large amount of contact and field ok letting age and development add a little power to it. But the Nats seem to want to make him a more selective hitter. It's not producing more walks or better hit balls instead making him more vulnerable to lower pitches in the zone that he now feels he needs to go after since he can't chase higher pitches out wide.

If the Nats leave him alone I think Garcia holds off the competition. If the Nats keep forcing him to go away from what probably is a 100-110 OPS+ major league bat on the small chance of making him something greater, I think he fails. 

Whether or not that failure leads to replacement is anyone's guess. You all know that I am not high on Alu.  I am low. Very low. He stinks.  Lipscomb got everyone excited but just died at the end of the year. Probably that's the grind getting to him but hitting .136 / .174 / .185 for a fifth of the season can't be ignored completely. Yohandy is probably the most exciting one - a guy that just hit in college who continued to do just that in the minors albeit with strangely limited power.  Do the Nats try the former SS at 2B? It's possible. But it's probably more likely they start using him at 1B. He's a big unknown only playing 18 g in A, 18 in A+ and 4 in AA and it's hard to project anything for him just yet. 

Given all that Garcia likely plays 2B for most of, if not all the year. This is what I would do so... good! After that I don't know. He seems to be on Rizzo's bad side but he probably slots in as the perfectly acceptable 4th in an all-young all-cheap infield in 2025, or in a young infield with a 1B FA.

Off-Season Position Discussion : First Base

The Nats 1B situation feels bad. Dom Smith, who manned the bag in 2023 couldn't hit and only fielded ok. The Nats were fine with that this past season because they wanted to provide their young infielders with a decent defensive target and they wanted someone young enough that they could maybe get a surprise improvement.  Dom checked both of those boxes.  But going into 2024 it's hard to say he checks the second box now four years removed from his brief moment of pandemic season stardom. 

It seems pretty obvious that the Nats should upgrade here, that first base is an easily place to upgrade with a big bat even if they can't field well. But the Nats don't seem inclined to put money into the team right now and even if they did pitching seems like more of a necessity.  Also, sneakily, maybe Dom isn't so bad after all? 

Here are 1/3 of the MLB's 1B situations in 2023

SEA :  Ty France - barely average hitter and a stiff in the field

SDP : Jake Croneneworth mostly - barely average hitter and mediocre in the field

DET : Spencer Torkleson - ok hitter should get better, fielding wise... let's generously say waiting for Miggy to clear out of DH 

MIL : Rowdy Tellez - bad hitter, bad fielder. Replaced mid-season with Carlos Santana - a good hitter and good fielder who also will be 38 next year

CHC : A lot of Bellinger who was pretty good but you'd rather have in the OF. Forced to play there bc Mancini and Mervis were terrible with the bat

MIA : Yuri Gurriel got old and Garret Cooper was never special, not particularly good in the field

HOU : Jose Abreu got old and is also not particularly good in the field

COL : Montero, Cron - a bunch of awful bats with no real redeeming fielding.

KC : Pasquatino can hit but is a butcher in the field.  A big improvement over Nick Pratto though who was awful in every way. Still might end up as Sal Perez's landing spot so maybe that works

LAA : After trying 3-4 guys that couldn't hit or field, would use Drury but he was kind of wasted at first, until they got to Schanuel a prospect that should hit ok and should field ok. 

 Anyway the point is this is the state of first base in baseball today. There is not a bunch of guys that can hit ok and field ok out there.  There aren't bunch of good bats needing a place to land even if it's not ideal. No, about half the league would love to upgrade their first base and they can't. This includes competitive teams.

Presumed Plan : Dom Smith returns, Joey backs up while they keep fiddling around with Riley Adams and maybe start fiddling around with Lane Thomas.

Reasoning behind Presumed Plan : See above. There aren't a lot of options and there will be a fair amount of competition to the options that do exist.  Bellinger will probably get the big money and Hoskins will likely get the follow-up with anyone else worth getting having to be a position shift. The Nats might be interested in spending money but it's doubtful they will reach for anything when what they have isn't broken. Instead expect a SP focus as the market there has some depth and the Nats need something decent and reliable, if not great. 

They like Dom. Dom seems to like it here. He serves his purpose and will likely take another 1 year contract so the Nats don't have to commit to him past this upcoming season. They like Joey and Joey is very cheap.  Value wise the Nats are actually doing pretty well here.

My Take :  We've come a long way from the roid days when you couldn't lift a first base without finding a guy hitting .270 with 30 homers. With the pharmaceutical propping up of bats no longer happening, there is no longer a surplus. The ones that can play a position are doing so, and with the expansion of the DH the ones that can't play a position aren't. That leaves 1B a no-man's land full of 2nd/3rd best non-fielding bats and slick fielding 1B prospects whose bats never developed. Dom sort of fits the latter.

Not that there isn't big potential issues here. Dom's mediocre 2023 was better than either of his previous two seasons and an upset Dom in the past has been flat out terrible. If his situation here gets murky and he gets unhappy history says he'll tank hard. 

There isn't much better behind him either. Joey showed his true nature last year which is a guy that can hit ok. That's also fine I guess. Riley Adams might get more of a shot but given his glove work I can't imagine it working out unless he puts everything together at the plate and we just forget about it. Although at that point you'd probably want him at DH.  

I do think Lane Thomas at 1B is an interesting possibility. He's worse in the OF than he looks and even if he bounces back he was never a plus guy out there. But he does seem athletic to a degree and if that translates to decent 1B defense it can solve that issue of where to put his bat which is decent but not really want you imagine a DH to be.

Look I don't know.  It's hard to shake off the memories of our youth but the facts are the 1B situation today resembles the 70s more than the 90s. In this environment Dom is... fine? He easily could drift back to an even worse place with his bat but if he's under the expected one year deal (or one year plus a team option - which is what I think is most likely) then you just cut bait in August/September and move on. There's no downside other than it hurting 2024 but there is no indication the Nats are in it for 2024.  Oh, I suppose it keeps the Nats from setting up the position for 2025 which they may actually care about but I just don't see them putting the money into getting one of the two guys who'd definitely be worth it. But if they do - great! I'd be all in for Hoskins, older but more reliable than the wild potential of Cody Bellinger. I just don't see it happening. 

The Nats need to make FA moves but only SP is a must especially in this environment. If they go for a bat, be it 1B, 3B, or OF then that should be a secondary move. It would be a strong one, showing real commitment to competing sooner rather than later but a gutsy one with the reliance on prospects to fill out holes.  I don't think the Nats are that gutsy.  So I expect Dom back. 

Off-Season Position Discussion : Catcher

The Nats catching situation is a matter of perspective. On one hand the Nats have a middling hitting catcher, with a unproven back-up, neither of which can field at all according to the limited stats.  On the other hand they have one of the youngest starting catchers in the league, wrapped up for a reasonable value, who is a top half offensive player for the position backed up by a player that mashed lefties in 2023.  

If you think the fielding is really that bad, and I mean you think it is easily worst in the majors bad, then the situation isn't great. The offense being merely ok can't overcome this deficiency and the Nats have a well below average position hurting them. If you think the fielding is not that bad and either this was just a fluke season, random variation, or bad stats, even if it is bottom 5, the offense balances it better and the Nats are left with a spot while not helping the squad doesn't hurt them.  Considering how easy it is for the C position to hurt a team a fair amount that's a win. 

But the Nats didn't want this to be a default win. They wanted catcher to be a plus.  Does the lack of movement here change anything going forward?

Presumed Plan : 

Ruiz with Adams as a back-up.

Reasoning behind Presumed Plan : 

Ruiz has been signed to that long term contract (through 2030 at least) and the Nats appear committed to giving him a good long try at making it.  Figure at the very least through 2025 as first choice starter, with another year of an aborted try even if things look grim. 

Adams platoons well with Ruiz if he can mash lefties because Ruiz has a big power issue from the right side. While he did hit for a much higher average from the right side this year, that wasn't the case last year, unlike the power imbalance. You can count on him NOT hitting homers batting righty. You can't count on him hitting .290.

Since Riley doesn't hit RHP that great and neither fields well there isn't anything more to look at here at the top. 

As for the minors there are some guys to look at, most notably Drew Millas. He hit very well in AA, ok in AAA, and pretty good in a brief stint in the majors.  He's also more well thought of defensively.

My Take :  

There really isn't a very good reason to abort this plan.  Adams hit lefties well but it was just one year, he hit rather poorly this year against righties, and he can't field the position well either. He doesn't look like a replacement. You signed him to have him be a cornerstone of your team. Now you play him.  I'd love it if the Nats showed they were going all out to help him and sign some very specific outside catcher help.  maybe they have? Make a show of it though. You committed millions to the guy, committing a few tens of thousands more for one on one defensive training should be an obvious move.

What about Millas?  Well Millas made himself a decent prospect and if he hits in AAA (where we presume he'll start to play everyday) that will cause a quandry. A good "too many startable young guys at catcher" quandry, but a quandry nonetheless. Since Millas can field (we assume) then if he can hit like Ruiz you'd want to play him.  But Ruiz has the contract so Millas will be far easier to deal and bring more back. Also Ruiz doesn't hit that well to shift him. Niether does Millas really. There's a lot of ways this works out fine. Most likely Ruiz is about average and Millas is about average in AAA and you sort of work Millas up as the back-up, letting Adams either go or work himself into a DH/1B platoon if he's still mashing lefties.  But if Millas hits good, not great but good, and Ruiz hits below average that sets up a "do you try to get better behind the plate with about the same offense you hope while kind of making a mess of that contract" situation.

I'll note here that Millas is 6 months OLDER than Ruiz so this isn't like Ruiz is blocking a phenom if Millas does well.

The Nats aren't in a bad situation here but they were really hoping it was going to be a good one. It still could be but in 2023 it wasn't.  Here's to Ruiz making it work and Millas also hitting ok to become nice trade bait.

HOF Managers Yes or No

First off - YES!  Let them all in! Who really cares about which managers are in?! Do we even know how to judge these guys?! 

Anyway Managers up for the Hall and their stats

Cito Gaston : 894-837 (.516), 5 postseason appearances with 1 team in 12 years, Two World Series appearances with two titles (92/93 Blue Jays), first Black manager to win a World Series

Davey Johnson : 1372-1071 (.562), 6 postseason appearances with 4 different teams in 17 years, One World Series appearance with one title (86 Mets), above .500 record with every team managed

Jim Leyland : 1769-1728 (.506), 8 postseason appearances with 3 different teams in 22 years, Three World Series appearances with one title (97 Marlins), retired after three straight first place finishes

Lou Pinella : 1835-1713 (.517), 7 postseason appearances with 3 different teams in 23 years, One World Series appearance with one title (90 Reds), Managed team with most wins ever (116 win 2001 Mariners)

Pinella has the most wins of any non-active, non Gene Mauch* manager.  Leyland is right behind him. Davey has the highest winning percentage of any non-active standard manager with more than like 6 seasons managed** that's not in the Hall. Cito is one of the few multi title winners not in the Hall. They all

Post season records on another level are worth looking at Pinella won 5 series and lost 6, Leyland won 9 and lost 7, Johnson won 5 and lost 5, Gaston 4 and 4. 

You can make a good argument for any of them, but there are really three different Hall of Fame manager arguments and we're seeing two of them here.  The arguments are (1) how do we judge nulti-title managers, (2) how do we judge one title managers, and (3) how do we judge no title managers. 

Pinella, Leyland, & Johnson are all in the one title group and the decision to be made isn't clear. Davey is probably the best manager, and in my mind most deserving of the three. But he did managed like 1000 fewer games than either of the other two.  Pinella was probably a better regular season manager but ran into more disappointment in the playoffs than Leyland did. If you look outside of managing for some reaons, in terms of baseball feelings, people generally like Leyland the most. Pinella and Johnson both could be ornery. Pinella though was clearly the best player, kind of a Hall of Good type. Davey had a solid career. Leyland was a nothing.

My personal ranking would be Davey, Leyland, Pinella, with the only reason Davey isn't in already is the fact he was his own worst enemy keeping jobs, but I could see it going exactly the opposite way.

Gaston doesn't particularly compare well with these guys, almost 2000 games behind the most seasoned two and with a record overall that isn't special. But he is in the two title manager argument. While one title can be seen as a fluke, being at the right place at the right time, generally two titles are your ticket in. Gaston's problem is that Ralph Houk and Danny Murtaugh exist. Both of these guys are also two-title winners and haven't really come close to getting in the Hall. Houk has about the same winning percentage but a lot more games managed.  Murtaugh has about the same number of games managed but a higher winning percentage. It's hard on a just results to put Gaston in over either of these guys. BUT Gaston is historically important in a way Murtaugh and Houk are not an that should and does matter. When electing anyone, place in the game is important and Gaston inhabits a space Houk and Murtaugh do not. 

Personally I'd go Murtaugh, Gaston, Houk if I was ranking all three but we're only deciding on one and it's Gaston and I guess I'd go with no? But I'm not pitching a fit if he gets in. He's worthy. I will say though if he gets in then Murtaugh will almost be a given the next time he comes around.

There are also umpires (West is a shoo-in) and others (bet on the beloved Bill White) 

*Mauch managed a very long time and was considered someone that did well with lousy teams. But doing well with lousy teams doesn't translate to wins and he only made the playoffs twice, losing both series he managed. He's kind of become the "ok better than this gets in" line.

**there are two Negro League managers with higher percentages, one that managed 7 and one 11 years though the seasons noted are half as long if that. There's also a pre-1900 manager with 9 seasons. But the point stands that no one is really close given Davey managed far more games than all these guys. 

The Boz must be crazy

Tom Boswell is back, jack! And that's Jack Morris because it's time for takes as bad as Jack Morris being in the Hall of Fame. Boswell pens a piece for the Post that tries to envision a Nats' present that involves keeping Bryce, Trea, and Soto and letting Stras and Rendon go.  In a sense, it's making the best FA deals they could have made avoiding mistakes.

It's an interesting thought experiment that unfortunately Boz doesn't put much thought into.  In his world signing Bryce stops the Nats from winning the 2019 World Series and then the team fails to do any better in 2020-2023 and without the trades of Max & Trea & Soto and the terrible 2022 that gave them the Crews pick in 2023 they have a terrible farm. In his mind they become the Angels of the NL.  But is this really how it would go?  Let's just go with results. 

2019 : 100% signing Bryce likely means they don't sign Corbin and maybe they don't sign / trade for a couple other guys.  Which ones? Dozier? Ok yeah. Anibal. No, they need a starter. One of Gomes/Suzuki? Probably.  But also they maybe let Adams walk and Bryce plays 1B. And they probably don't give Rosenthal 7 million for the worst pitching you've ever seen. 

Do they make the playoffs? You'd have to think so. They'd have to be 7-8 games worse to miss. And they didn't win the division remember. In fact the most reasonable guess, that they are a couple games worse, which means they likely still host the WC. 

Now do they win the World Series? You'd have to guess not. In part because the special role Corbin and other guys played in that run. In part because winning the World Series takes a huge bit of luck. The Nats were a better use of Hader, a Will Smith fly ball going 5 feet deeper, and multiple shots off Max Scherzer going right at guys from not doing it. Chances of rolling sevens again are slim. So Boz is right about this

2020 : But in 2020 what happens? It's a COVID year so it's weird but the Nats OF and 1B situation was flat out awful. Bryce would have been a couple game improvement by himself even in a shortened season. And the Nats were counting on Stras who gave them nothing. With an average performance by anyone they get a couple games there. Corbin by this time was a tick below average. Easy enough to make up. I'll admit that's only 30-30 as a record maybe. But 29-31 made the playoffs. The Nats are in it and if they are in it, they can win it. 

2021 : The further we go into this the harder it is to gauge. Again Stras is a nothing and Corbin is now terrible so NOT relying on them is actually going to likely help the team by literal multiple wins. The offense wasn't bad but was unlucky and perhaps Bryce in there is what it needs to click into the top level offense it should have been. But we can't expect GOOD pitching and all this still probably only puts them around .500 at the trade deadline. If they don't sell Max and Trea there's a chance they make a run instead of collapse, and maybe they make some moves. The problem is this year it took 88 wins to win the NL East (90 to win the WC) and I'm not quite sure they make it. 

2022 : And now things probably do go off the rails. If Max leaves (which is the assumption if they are paying Trea and about to pay Soto) and Ross gets injured then there is no one left to pitch and even with the three stars and whatever budget pick-ups they make they are still probably slugging their way to about .500. A ton better than 55 wins but likely nowhere near enough to the 87 it would take to get the playoffs.

2023 : It might get interesting here.  It only took 84 wins to make the playoffs this year and if they did anything right with starters since 2021 they might have put together enough to get over this small hump.  But then again, maybe not. Finding pitching is hard. 

For the second part we need to imagine what would their minors look like. I must admit probably not this good. They didn't get much from any tear down trade before 2022 and let's just say Max gets then Ruiz or Grey.  Up until here that's not too different.  But Soto did give them a full handful of decent prospects. None of those guys; Wood, Susana, Gore, Abrams, Hassell, would be here and that's 3 of the Nats Top 12 prospects, including a Top 10ish overall guy gone. That's not even considering the two guys contributing in the majors also not here. 

The draft is big unknown. This is all just spitballing. 2020's middling season got them Brady House in 2021. A better record though could have gotten a comparable well thought of toolsy SS in later rounds. That draft was lousy with them. 2022 got them Elijah Green. A .500 ish record and the same aim of a toolsy OF couldn't help but get someone better than the faltering Green. The guys that fit that description at that point in the draft are actually pretty decent prospect. 2023 got them Crews and I'm not going to even look - around .500 doesn't get them something as good as Crews. But like I said there's a lot more unknowns here. Do they focus more on international signings if they don't have the draft picks? Do they go after more pitchers because of the hitters they signed? 

If I were to guess if they signed all three they definitely make the playoffs in 2020 and in one of the next three years things fall right and they make it again. If they make the playoffs twice more that's two more chances to win a World Series. Of course they probably don't - they did make it in 2012, 14, 16 and 17 and came up empty, but we just don't know. Also the seasons are just a lot more fun to watch. They would have a fairly barren farm system though and would not really have a good plan on how they are going to get that pitching to complement the hitting. Comparing this imaginary 2023 Bryce/Trea/Soto led Nats team to a team like the Angels isn't that far off. Not in 2020 or 2021 but for 2023... I think Boz is actually pretty on the nose. 

BUT

Boz misses one big point. What if the Nats signed Bryce and Trea and traded Soto? The minors are almost entirely the same. Sure they lack Grey or Ruiz and that matters, but one of them is here along with Abrams and Gore. They also don't have Crews but they likely lucked into an actual OF prospect when kept from selecting Green.  And importantly they do have is a lot of money that could go into signing a starter or two. What if that Soto money went into Verlander? Or if they got it exactly right and got Senga and Eflin? Then the 2023 Nats have the young players AND a decent enough 1-2-3 in the rotation have been playing a week ago.  

The Nats present isn't great but it could have been better. With the hindsight information we have now we can piece together a way the Nats are both competitive now AND have some hope for the future as well. This isn't magic! We know exactly how things have gone! One should be able to do this!  What it turns out the Nats needed to do was sign Bryce and Trea and trade Soto in a fleecing deal. Or really you could say they need to sign two of them and get a ton back in a deal for the trade they do make.

To say the Nats did everything exactly right is to excuse the terribleness of the past few years as necessary. It wasn't. With the right moves the Nats could have shifted from window to window with a minor drop to .500 ish for a year or two. Could the Nats have made those exact right moves? It would have been tough. I'm certainly not going to say yes, but I'll acknowledge it's possible. That they didn't "do the right thing" in an absolute sense. 

How about in a relative sense? Not knowing if you can make those right moves, is tearing down to build up the best move? I think an argument can be made that it is. I don't agree but again I have to acknowledge that it's possible. But now the onus is on the Nats to prove that is what they did. We know they tore down. Did they build up? 

If they didn't then the Nats didn't do the right things no matter how you look at it. They didn't make the absolute right moves, and they didn't make the right choices to make the relative right moves, if you believe that's what they were, work.  I'm not giving them credit for knowing the best path to take if they trip and fall down into a ravine while taking it. 

The starting point for 2024

One thing before we get into off-season position discussions.  I've alluded to this a few times but the Nats weren't as good as their record suggests they were. 

I would think we all know by now about the "Pythagorean" record, but maybe some don't so a quick refresher that your W/L tend to scale along with the number of runs you score and runs you allow. It does so in a fairly regular way and has over the years. Given that when your actual record skews far off from your Pythagorean one, you can fairly safely attribute it to luck.  Attempts to suggest it was something else, don't seem to hold going forward or looking back*, nor do they necessarily match up with the best and worst teams in the league. 

Luck happens. We all know it does. Part of having a good year is actually minimizing that luck, but really you just hope it breaks for you. You don't get the one or two injuries you can't afford. You sneak out a couple more close wins than you probably should. Anyway the Nats won 71 games last year. Their Pythagorean record says they should have won around 67.  That's probably low enough to suggest the Nats were a little lucky. 

But some stats guys have even gone beyond that trying to adjust also for strength of schedule and the actual talent on the teams you faced when you faced them.  These "adjusted standings" try to get a more accurate picture of the team as it stands. The same ones I noted last year had the Nats as more of a 61 win team that had misfortune. This year they were more of a 63 win team. 

Now of course what does this matter? It certainly doesn't matter at all for this year. No one is going to "correct" the win totals of teams. They went out there, won those games and that's done with. What it does though, is give you a reasonable suggestion of where you should start your analysis for next years Nats team.  When it comes down to it they did not have the talent of a "in a vacuum" 71 win team. It was more like 67 or 63.  If you said 65 that would probably be fair. It's from that point the Nats are trying to improve.

That makes the jump to competitive that much harder, but you want to be realistic. The Nats don't need to add ~10 games to get in the conversation, they need to add ~16.  That's another superstar or two more good players. 

I think the Nats know this, if not directly in this manner. They know they aren't potentially a competitive team in 2024 without everything going their way. This is why the off-season FA talk is muted. It's not going to take 2 smart signings to make things work, it'll take 4 and they aren't ready to do that. When instead they can maybe wait another year and have developing players cover a couple of those spots.  My response is fine. Think this. But make two signings anyway. Set up needing less to make it work going into 2024. Guarantee a step forward even if the minors don't provide help. Commit to a run at the playoffs, if only a flawed one for a couple years. Prove you aren't going to pack it all back in, slow walk the guys in the minors and move your sights to 2027.

The Nats still need a lot of work, more than last season would have you believe.  But they are losing time to do that work. It's time to start with the understanding it may very well likely take even more next off-season.

*in other words, "espirit d' corps" if it exists for some reason only seems to last season.

Is the Nats 2023 rebuild in a better place than 2010

Zuckerman suggests yes, the Nats are, in a vacuum, in a better spot today than they were in in 2010.  The hitting talent is younger. The pitching talent is no older. The Nats have a set of young potential stars, where in 2010 the number was smaller (for example once past the few couple you were on Michael Burgess and Eury Perez).  So by those numbers it does seem like the future might be brighter now. And, he suggests, if the Nats are willing to make moves like they did back then (sign a Werth, trade for a Gio) than they might develop on the same time frame, giving the Nats a true contender in 2025 and maybe good enough to try for a playoff spot in these expanded times next season.   

One obvious thing that Zuckerman glosses over is that Strasburg was seen not just as a pitcher but as a generational ace. Neither Gore nor Gray nor anyone in the Nats system is assumed to be one. Bryce Harper, one of the few highlights in the minors, was seen as a generational hitter, something that Crews and Wood hold only outside chances of being by most pundits. You could argue that even with their performances Strasburg and Bryce didn't quite live up to the hype and they were still extremely impactful players.  If the Nats current crop slightly underperforms they won't be great.

But really the important thing here is the one number Zuckerman glosses over - the number of things that hit. In 2010 to 11 to 12 it was nearly all across the board, an insane break of timing and luck that any team would be hard pressed to repeat. 

Wilson Ramos graduated to the majors and was an above average hitter immediately. Ian Desmond graduated to the majors and became an above average hitter. Morse was like August Joey but for a full year in 2011 and still good in 2012. Jordan Zimmermann became an ace pitcher. Gio Gonzalez became an ace pitcher. Werth was good in 2011, reasonable, if hurt in 2012. LaRoche sort of the opposite, bad/hurt in 2011 but good in 2012. Stammen, Storen, Clippard became multi-year plus relievers supplemented with randoms guys that would be good for a season. The Nats would draft Rendon. 

None of this was apparent in the post-season after 2010, outside of Morse maybe being good, so yes it looked darker. But in hindsight it got immediately surprisingly much better. It wasn't a natural development forward. It was a unexpected leap. To expect the 2024 Nats to perhaps be better than the 2011 Nats would require both FA input like Werth and an equivalent unexpected leap, maybe more of one since as noted they lack the Strasburg and probably don't have the Bryce. 

It's not too hard to see the offense match what the Nats were in 2011/2012. Beyond the FA acquisitions to make up for Werth & LaRoche yet undefined the pieces are mostly there.  You need a prospect to play like early Bryce but early Bryce wasn't THAT good. Crews or Wood might do it. Someone would have to be good like Morse, but Thomas might be able to do that without Morse's peak, or maybe Garrett or Meneses. You'd need two guys to get good like Desmond and Ramos. Abrams seems to have that potential and there's a handful of guys - Ruiz, Garcia, the other of Crews/Wood, Hassell, Lipscomb, House - to be the other guy.  There's another big piece missing here - Ryan Zimmerman as the young star. I'm not sure what you do about that but maybe two of that handful work out fast? Regardless you can make out something for the 2025 Nats that isn't too far off the 2012 Nats assuming FAs are coming.

The pitching though. Can Gray/Gore/Cavalli/? have a good year where it all comes together like Detwiler? Probably. Can one blossom into an ace like ZNN did?  Maybe. But even so can the Nats trade for a guy who also aces out like Gio? And what about the missing Strasburg ace already in place if he heals (which he did)?  The bullpen might have two of the decent arms noted with Finnegan and Harvey, but both those guys are older than any of the three building blocks were in 2010.  From the looks of how the pen has performed it's hard to see enough of the annual surprise guys coming. You just can't make out the pitching to be like 2012 unless there are huge surprises.

So while the counts and the ages suggest a brighter future looking ahead from 2023 than from 2010, the talent in place presents a more mixed view and hindsight tells us the 2010 to 2012 move was as much about what surprised the Nats as it was moving forward with a plan. 

To compete in 2025 the Nats need FAs and the Nats need surprises. At least as many offensively, which might happen, but more pitching wise, which likely won't. To limit the surprises need the Nats need to lean more into FA or have a couple great trades.

Lucky or Unlucky : 2023

As part of my annual series, it's time to review the Nats season to see where they got lucky, where they got unlucky, and where things broke as expected.  This is a player based evaluation, so we aren't diving into adjusted standings and things like schedule strength and hit sequencing. We're going on what we thought players would most likely do going into the year and what they did do?  This team won a few more games than expected but I'm not sure specific player luck played into that. Let's see!

Lucky 

Candelario - The Nats gambling on FAs has been noticeably poor. But Jeimer was a great pick-up who found his bat while fielding 3B at an elite level. In the brief time with the Nats he was the best player, so much so he arguably still had the most value for the 2023 team's season despite being traded at the deadline. He probably isn't as good with the bat as he showed for the Nats (as evident by his modest play over 40 games for the Cubs) so the Nats got maximum value here - getting a guy in DJ Herz who might be something someday. Hey, the bar these days for deadline deals is WAY lower.

Garrett - Bad teams roll the dice on other people's trash. You expect it to be trash, but you hope to find something useful among a half-dozen players.  Garrett was arguably more than that, playing decent OF and hitting pretty well for half a season. Over the course of a season the guy playing like this is more valuable than Lane.

Adams - Attempts to play Adams every day failed and he didn't look like he had particular use at the major league level, but this year he showed a big jump in platoon splits, mashing lefties in a way he hadn't previously. From a nothing to a guy who potentially fits in well as a rest day fill-in for Ruiz (who has NO power batting RH) that's a good break for the Nats

Unlucky

Adams / Garrett injuries - Of course the latter two lucky breaks broke, literally.  Garrett broke his leg in late August and Adams broke his hand in early September. Injuries happen but you want to happen to bad players more than good.

Robles injury - Speaking of injuries Robles, forever in the Nats doghouse for one reason or another, was finally hitting and it wasn't just luck. He was hitting the ball much harder, quite possibly in reaction to the "we were wrong on Robles bc we didn't consider how hard he hit the ball" pieces that came out. Maybe this was the year he put it all together... but no, back issues limited him to 36 games this year.

Williams - Signing a guy for one year limits his value in trade. Signing for two makes more sense and signing a SP is an even better way to get more value. Trevor Williams had failed as a starter in go around one but was good as a spot starter and longer reliever and wanted another try.  How bad could it be? Bad. Worse than Corbin. Possibly the worst full season starter in baseball in 2023. I mean bad is a possibility, but worst? That's bad luck. 

 

As Expected

Strasburg - it was unlikely Strasburg would ever come back to pitch. He didn't.

Ruiz, Abrams, Garcia - The most likely scenario for any one of the young guys was they remain major league players, of around average value. That is what happened. Abrams shows a bit of spark, Garcia might be faltering but here they are averageish players in 2023.

Smith - Dom isn't good at the plate and he wasn't good this year. He's ok in the field and he was ok this year.

Call - Outside half a year of AAA ball Call looked like "all field no hit". Hey! That's what he is!

Thomas - Lane is fine. A hitter who plays poor OF who is useful because 3 OF can be hard to find and he's still a better bat than like 1/3 of the DH starting. Oh and he's cheap.

Meneses - Joey not being JOEY but being ok had to be the most likely scenario after the end of last year got people excited in him.

Rest of the minors who reached majors outside Adams and Garrett - non prospects doing non prospect things 

Corbin - we know what Corbin is now and it's this. With the bad luck taken away he's not historically bad but he's still Top 10-15-20 worst in the majors.

Gray / Gore - Similar to Ruiz and Abrams. You plot outcomes and this is where these guys end up in projections and then in reality. Gray got a little lucky with ERA but he also seems to always which likely means he has some skill that isn't caught in the FIP stuff but it's not a lot of skill we're talking about and the FIP is bad so the end result isn't amazing. 

Irvin/Adon - 5th starter types pitching like a 5th starters.   Adon got some bad ERA breaks, Irvin good ones. That happens. Neither are anything surprising

Finnegan/Harvey - The good veteran relievers remained good. Neither broke out to be special or collapsed to be bad.

Rest of pen (Sorsa, Ferrer / Abbott Ward) - Thompsons collapse might have been a bit of bad luck but that was more personal to him. His pitching was still useful.  Other than that a mix of AAAA arms who in any year some guys will be ok and some will be bad. Edwards got hurt but he's old. 

The Nats season in a player luck sense played out almost TOO regular. They had some lucky finds but ended up with them for limited times evening that out. Otherwise everything basically went according to plan.  The thing is the plan was never to be good. 

Not much will change on the player level next year either. Ruiz/Gray/Gore/Abrams/Garcia will be expected to be around average. The call-ups will probably be expected late and not necessarily contribute much in 2024. Everything around these guys is mediocre to bad. If the plan happens again the Nats won't be good and it won't be a surprise. 

As we've said for the Nats to be good they need (1) the minors to produce multiple someones who we can expect to be good in 2025 (though as noted not 2024 that would be a surprise)  and (2) they need to get FA they can expect to be good. Because right now the expectations is a lot of average backed up by a lot of bad.  That's the recipe for a ~70 win season going forward and while that was a pleasant surprise in 2023, it won't be if you see it in 2024, 2025, and 2026

Monday - Year in Review - Overview P1 - Nothing fancy

The Nats season is over. Their final record stands at 71-91. They were still last place in the NL East, and were tied for the 5th worst record in baseball. However they were confidently better than the dregs of the game, 10 games clear of the 4th worst record in baseball, which is an improvement over last year. The Nats got some measure of clarity during the season with Davey and Rizzo returning and the team looking like they won't sell in the immediate future. It will be another full go around for the Lerner/Rizzo combo that was so successful the first time through, albeit the first time with some things set up for them coming in. 

The Nats goals for this year were modest and they hit them modestly. Going in this was a franchise looking toward 2025 so you simply wanted the young guys in the majors already to solidify those roles and the minors to look like there could be impact players coming to help by that time. You have to answer positively to both of these goals. The fear of failure, and the rebuild coming undone before it really got started, did not come to pass.  

But the realizations were not revelations. The young guys in the majors solidified useful roles, but not much more. The guys who could be impact players in the next few years looked good, but not penciled in favorites for ROY in the next two seasons. The Nats are probably ready to take the next step but will need external (re: Free Agent) help to get there. 

So we leave 2023 where you would have said you needed to be when the season started, but not likely where you hoped to be. Offensively there are a handful of guys that could be the next Nats star, but as of today there isn't a single spot just yet to hang your hat on and point to saying "That's what's going to carry the Nats forward". In 2024 you need someone to become that guy. On the mound there are a couple guys that will fill out a rotation but there isn't that potential ace that will be in the top of the rotation, eating innings and giving the Nats likely wins every fifth time out there. In 2024 you need to have clarity on where that guy is coming from. 

While 2023 could not serve to give early answers on where the 2025 competitive team was coming from, it should help provide clarity on who is not going to be helping that team. Older guys did get decent trials at the major league level and showed little. These guys need to be cast off in favor of better bets to be helpful down the road. This isn't a team just filling space anymore. Each spot needs a thoughtful choice who is either helping the team now or might do so over the next three years.  No more fill-in lottery tickets. No more other team's trash. 

2023 ends as a success, but a success in that it allows the opportunity for 2024 to set up 2025 and beyond. Let's see the Nats make that happen.