The end of the regular season ends the year for 20 teams, with 6 more to follow in close succession. But the off-season doesn't truly begin until the World Series is over. There are only a certain subset of players available now. Players outrighted during the regular season who could have refused it but decided not to. (Tommy Milone!) Or guys they have tried to outright now to clear some 40 man space where the player refused. You'll see the occasional waiver claim related to these outrightings but generally these are players lucky to be any teams last man on bench/in bullpen. (Hey Danny Santana, I heard of you!)
Sometime in early November the normal contracts end and free agents become free agents. They'll be an option decision day a couple days later. And then a qualifying offer day. Maybe there's a trade or two in there to free up space again for a guy they couldn't agree with but that's it. Then - about a week into November the flood gates open.
Which makes it all the more surprising the Nats already made a move that would not be considered minor. The Nats traded for Kyle Barraclough. The Marlins want International Bonus Pool money and the Nats were willing to deal it. Is Barraclough good? well...
In 2016 Kyle was really very good. Outside of a tendency to be wild (5.4 BB/9) he did everything else well. He was unhittable (5.6 H/9), struck out a ton of guys (14 K/9!) and didn't didn't give up homers (1 homer in 72 innings). That last one is important because it really is his M.O. Over 149 minor league innings Kyle gave up just two homers and in his first nearly 100 major league inning he matched that. This is a combination that works and you could let Kyle walk himself into trouble knowing full well he was going to get out of it. 2017 though brought more hits, fewer Ks, and more homers and the near dominant reliever became just a good arm in the pen. In 2018 he reigned in the hits a bit, but the Ks were down again and the homers were up. Last year, homers were a problem. He gave up 8 in just 55 innings.
That's worrying having a guys best feature disappear over two years. It's not necessarily a fluke, either. His HR/FB rate is pretty normal (16.3%) and his FB% isn't high. His fastball speed is diminishing rapidly (95.6 in 2016, 93.6 last year). His slider used to be super effective, but it is no longer so he's trying to rely more on a change up with decidedly mixed results. With neither the fastball or the slider giving him an out, Kyle needs to grow into a pitcher.
This all sounds bad. What's good? He costs about 2 million. He's 29 in late May next year. He's probably better than a bunch of guys the Nats trotted out the mound last year.
The question is what are the Nats expecting here with Barraclough. Is he a bullpen filler with a flier on maybe being something better? Then Kyle is perfect. He shouldn't have an age-related steep decline next year. He's been healthy his whole career. Get him to keep those balls in the park and he's Wander Suero or Justin Miller with an ability to step in and be the "Get a K or a BB here" guy. Is he expected to be a late inning guy? Then that's too much to expect given his 2018 and his career trajectory.
The Nats still need late inning arms but Kyle makes a good edition to the "rest of the bunch" and people seem to like his last name. Pair him with Koda Glover out there. Get Evan Gattis to quit baseball and sign him as the bullpen coach. Call the bullpen the Bear Den and we're set.
In other news :
The MLB Trade Rumors arbitration guesses are out and I think Rendon's is a little light but it's all just guessing anyway. It'll be something close to these if you want to throw some numbers back into the "how much money will the Nats have to spend" arguments. I think we were relatively close so nothing much changes about that.
Monday, October 15, 2018
Tuesday, October 09, 2018
Off-Season Position Discussion : First Base
Last year discussion revisited
We all knew Zimm was coming back. Both the contract and his play in 2017 (.303 / .358 / .573 in 144 G with a scorching hot start) merited it. But we all knew that the 115, 95, and 61 G played in the seasons before 2017 meant a solid back-up was necessary. We hoped for Adam Lind, but expected the Nats to move in another (cheaper) direction.
All this ended up being true. Zimm was penned in as the starter. They let Lind walk. They ended up saving a bit going with the 4 million dollar Matt Adams, who was arguably a better all-around player than Lind. Then the wheels fell off. Zimm got injured and didn't participate in Spring Training. The team lied to the reporters who subsequently got snippy with us fans who were like "Obviously something is up" They'd pick up Mark Reynolds for AAA depth early in the year again sending up the fireworks of "ZIMM IS HURT" which was dutifully ignored by the media.
He'd heal up enough to start the year but struggle mightily then go out with an oblique for the late Spring and early Summer. The good news is the back-up plans worked as well as could be hoped. Adams and Reynolds would both play very well in replacement of Zimm. While both would tail off as the season went on, no one could complain about their overall performance for the year. Zimm would eventually come back and put up decent numbers but would play in just over half the season.
My OOB idea would have flopped. I wanted to deal Zimm at a high, move Murphy over to first, have Kendrick at second. That's not a bad plan in retrospect but Murphy not playing for as long as he did, then slowly working back in would have derailed it from the start.
Presumed Plan : Zimmerman will play first base and some other player will take the place of the Lind, Adams role. Lucas Duda? Logan Morrison? Adams or Lind again? who knows.
Reasoning on Presumed Plan : This is Zimmerman's last year under his big contract. When he's healthy he can hit, but he's rarely healthy. So you back him up with a pretty good replacement. If he is healthy that replacement can find a way to work in the line-up elsewhere (OF, DH, occasional spot start). The plan has worked well for two years now, I don't see why they'd change it in this last one.
Adams is gone, so it's a bit unlikely he'll be back but who knows. I think the Nats will dangle about the same contract out there (1yr 4/5 million, maybe with a team option for a 2nd year at about the same) and see what they can get. Morrison got 5.5 + 1 for a (assumed) declined option in 2019. Duda got 3.5.
Problems with Presumed Plan : The main thing is at some point the plan will fail. Lind and Adams were available because they weren't great. They managed to pick up their game for the Nats but you aren't going to keep getting it right. Even a smart pick up (Duda for 3.5 would be that) could fail just because baseball is like that sometimes. And if Zimm is hurt and the back-up fails, that's a big hole that needs to be filled.
The other problem is that while Zimm seems like a fine firstbaseman at the plate, he actually pales in comparison to his competition. Freeman, Goldschmidt, Votto, Rizzo, Carpenter/Martinez, Bellinger/Muncy, Jesus Aguilar are all more impactful at the plate then Zimm. Guys like Belt and Santana could be. That means Zimm isn't good - he's average. And that's just at the plate. He's a poor fielder given his arm issues and his continual accumulation of injuries. Basically, even if Zimm is healthy for the whole year he will probably still fall under the production most NL playoff teams get from their firstbaseman. He's not a plus.
My take : Shrug emoji? You can't deal Zimm. He costs too much as an injury risk. You can't trade for a first baseman as they are basically all concentrated on playoff teams (and would cost more than the Nats are willing to give up considering you'd have to go after someone definitively better than Zimm). No, Zimm is your first baseman in 2019 and you cross your fingers and hope either he's healthy or that if he's not, your back-up plan works. Unless...
OK the other idea would be to sign Bryce and have someone (Bryce or Soto) move to first and Zimm back them up. It's an expensive move but it is an option out there. More likely if you sign Bryce you look to trade an Eaton but if you don't this is a possibility. I don't think the Nats do this.
Out of the box suggestion :You know who might be available - not as a cheap back-up but as a deal because of recent troubles? Daniel Murphy. Sign him, platoon him with Zimm in some fashion for this year (and maybe next if Zimm wants to play that way to stick around DC and MLB for a couple more years). It's a bit of a gamble because Murphy will likely get a 2 year deal in the 8-10 million AAV dollar ranges (maybe with options but I don't count options because they'll almost always be team options for older players now) That's about twice as much as you'd pay for your cheap Zimm back up. But signing Murphy has a strong chance of paying off big time. If you believe he's healthy it has little chance of completely blowing up because he's such a solid hitter. AND it gives you a built in plan for 2020 when Zimm could be walking away. There's not much in the pipeline. There won't be that much available in FA. This might be a wise move.
We all knew Zimm was coming back. Both the contract and his play in 2017 (.303 / .358 / .573 in 144 G with a scorching hot start) merited it. But we all knew that the 115, 95, and 61 G played in the seasons before 2017 meant a solid back-up was necessary. We hoped for Adam Lind, but expected the Nats to move in another (cheaper) direction.
All this ended up being true. Zimm was penned in as the starter. They let Lind walk. They ended up saving a bit going with the 4 million dollar Matt Adams, who was arguably a better all-around player than Lind. Then the wheels fell off. Zimm got injured and didn't participate in Spring Training. The team lied to the reporters who subsequently got snippy with us fans who were like "Obviously something is up" They'd pick up Mark Reynolds for AAA depth early in the year again sending up the fireworks of "ZIMM IS HURT" which was dutifully ignored by the media.
He'd heal up enough to start the year but struggle mightily then go out with an oblique for the late Spring and early Summer. The good news is the back-up plans worked as well as could be hoped. Adams and Reynolds would both play very well in replacement of Zimm. While both would tail off as the season went on, no one could complain about their overall performance for the year. Zimm would eventually come back and put up decent numbers but would play in just over half the season.
My OOB idea would have flopped. I wanted to deal Zimm at a high, move Murphy over to first, have Kendrick at second. That's not a bad plan in retrospect but Murphy not playing for as long as he did, then slowly working back in would have derailed it from the start.
Presumed Plan : Zimmerman will play first base and some other player will take the place of the Lind, Adams role. Lucas Duda? Logan Morrison? Adams or Lind again? who knows.
Reasoning on Presumed Plan : This is Zimmerman's last year under his big contract. When he's healthy he can hit, but he's rarely healthy. So you back him up with a pretty good replacement. If he is healthy that replacement can find a way to work in the line-up elsewhere (OF, DH, occasional spot start). The plan has worked well for two years now, I don't see why they'd change it in this last one.
Adams is gone, so it's a bit unlikely he'll be back but who knows. I think the Nats will dangle about the same contract out there (1yr 4/5 million, maybe with a team option for a 2nd year at about the same) and see what they can get. Morrison got 5.5 + 1 for a (assumed) declined option in 2019. Duda got 3.5.
Problems with Presumed Plan : The main thing is at some point the plan will fail. Lind and Adams were available because they weren't great. They managed to pick up their game for the Nats but you aren't going to keep getting it right. Even a smart pick up (Duda for 3.5 would be that) could fail just because baseball is like that sometimes. And if Zimm is hurt and the back-up fails, that's a big hole that needs to be filled.
The other problem is that while Zimm seems like a fine firstbaseman at the plate, he actually pales in comparison to his competition. Freeman, Goldschmidt, Votto, Rizzo, Carpenter/Martinez, Bellinger/Muncy, Jesus Aguilar are all more impactful at the plate then Zimm. Guys like Belt and Santana could be. That means Zimm isn't good - he's average. And that's just at the plate. He's a poor fielder given his arm issues and his continual accumulation of injuries. Basically, even if Zimm is healthy for the whole year he will probably still fall under the production most NL playoff teams get from their firstbaseman. He's not a plus.
My take : Shrug emoji? You can't deal Zimm. He costs too much as an injury risk. You can't trade for a first baseman as they are basically all concentrated on playoff teams (and would cost more than the Nats are willing to give up considering you'd have to go after someone definitively better than Zimm). No, Zimm is your first baseman in 2019 and you cross your fingers and hope either he's healthy or that if he's not, your back-up plan works. Unless...
OK the other idea would be to sign Bryce and have someone (Bryce or Soto) move to first and Zimm back them up. It's an expensive move but it is an option out there. More likely if you sign Bryce you look to trade an Eaton but if you don't this is a possibility. I don't think the Nats do this.
Out of the box suggestion :You know who might be available - not as a cheap back-up but as a deal because of recent troubles? Daniel Murphy. Sign him, platoon him with Zimm in some fashion for this year (and maybe next if Zimm wants to play that way to stick around DC and MLB for a couple more years). It's a bit of a gamble because Murphy will likely get a 2 year deal in the 8-10 million AAV dollar ranges (maybe with options but I don't count options because they'll almost always be team options for older players now) That's about twice as much as you'd pay for your cheap Zimm back up. But signing Murphy has a strong chance of paying off big time. If you believe he's healthy it has little chance of completely blowing up because he's such a solid hitter. AND it gives you a built in plan for 2020 when Zimm could be walking away. There's not much in the pipeline. There won't be that much available in FA. This might be a wise move.
Monday, October 08, 2018
Monday Quickie - the definitive take on the season
Sorry - all other one paragraph takes on the season are wrong. Here we go :
The Nats thought that however many games lost during the regular season caused by replacing Dusty Baker with Davey Martinez would not matter. They also thought they could weather the lack of depth in the starting rotation by using their 5th starter sparingly bolstered by a well-paid back end of the bullpen. However, overuse of the quality pen arms coupled with the early failings of the starting pitchers cost them a few games. The Nats also got injured early, then played poorly, and then got unlucky. With the Braves and Phillies both having better first halves than expected, the Nats found themselves in a deeper hole then they imagined they could be in as the trade deadline neared. The Nats management did not choose to add to their roster. Instead they tried to create addition by subtraction, hoping that shedding what passed for malcontents in the Nats clubhouse could spark a run without committing resources. When this plan failed the Nats slowly sold off the remaining free agents to try to save some cash and limped to the finish line just over .500 at 82-80.
Who's to blame?
You can blame everyone. You can blame the decisions to go with Davey Martinez or to not address the starting pitching depth. You can blame injuries, bad play, bad luck (both with their own games and with Atlanta and Philadelphia playing very well to start the year), and Davey Martinez himself for a couple of more losses apiece than they should have had by the All-Star break. Any one of these things changes and perhaps the Nats decision making at that point changes. Once you get to the All-Star break, you can blame the management for half-heartedly punting on the season and also blame every thing else again, except bad luck, for the Nats not going on a run with the talent that was still in house.
If you ask me, I put most of the blame on the management. They made a couple decisions early that were likely to cost them a few games. This created a situation for the Nats that made a slower start more possible. They did try to do some mid-season corrections (trading for Herrerra) but mostly stood around waiting for the team to click and the season to move forward as expected. When time began to run out they had no idea what to do. The moves made at the trade deadline - jettisoning Kintzler and Kelley - and the reasonings that were given to the media for these moves - were the work of a management that had no plan for this situation and flailed in the face of difficulty.
Going forward I have faith that they'll set up a team that is competitive next season, assuming they want to, and will be a few games on either side of their best competitor in the NL East as summer moves along. But at that point I lose faith in the management. They have no belief in the big move, to either fend off or chase down another team, and Nats fans are left with only hope the Nats pull away, either because their talent takes off or the other team fails.
The Nats have World Series dreams and have adjusted their thinking in seasons where the playoffs are assured accordingly. Melancon, Doolittle/Kintzler/Madson. Kendrick. These are the moves of a serious team trying to fill in what remains of their gaps (with some measure of restraint). But to make the playoffs? The team has shown it does not have a plan for a playoff challenge and may never have one. The cost of adding enough talent to ensure (as much as is possible) a playoff spot being too high. The likelihood of changing playoff odds with smaller moves being too low to warrant spending any moderate amount. They will tinker. They may try to find a player a team is desperate to move. They will not commit. They will accept what the season throws at them and regroup for next year. This is their way.
The Nats thought that however many games lost during the regular season caused by replacing Dusty Baker with Davey Martinez would not matter. They also thought they could weather the lack of depth in the starting rotation by using their 5th starter sparingly bolstered by a well-paid back end of the bullpen. However, overuse of the quality pen arms coupled with the early failings of the starting pitchers cost them a few games. The Nats also got injured early, then played poorly, and then got unlucky. With the Braves and Phillies both having better first halves than expected, the Nats found themselves in a deeper hole then they imagined they could be in as the trade deadline neared. The Nats management did not choose to add to their roster. Instead they tried to create addition by subtraction, hoping that shedding what passed for malcontents in the Nats clubhouse could spark a run without committing resources. When this plan failed the Nats slowly sold off the remaining free agents to try to save some cash and limped to the finish line just over .500 at 82-80.
Who's to blame?
You can blame everyone. You can blame the decisions to go with Davey Martinez or to not address the starting pitching depth. You can blame injuries, bad play, bad luck (both with their own games and with Atlanta and Philadelphia playing very well to start the year), and Davey Martinez himself for a couple of more losses apiece than they should have had by the All-Star break. Any one of these things changes and perhaps the Nats decision making at that point changes. Once you get to the All-Star break, you can blame the management for half-heartedly punting on the season and also blame every thing else again, except bad luck, for the Nats not going on a run with the talent that was still in house.
If you ask me, I put most of the blame on the management. They made a couple decisions early that were likely to cost them a few games. This created a situation for the Nats that made a slower start more possible. They did try to do some mid-season corrections (trading for Herrerra) but mostly stood around waiting for the team to click and the season to move forward as expected. When time began to run out they had no idea what to do. The moves made at the trade deadline - jettisoning Kintzler and Kelley - and the reasonings that were given to the media for these moves - were the work of a management that had no plan for this situation and flailed in the face of difficulty.
Going forward I have faith that they'll set up a team that is competitive next season, assuming they want to, and will be a few games on either side of their best competitor in the NL East as summer moves along. But at that point I lose faith in the management. They have no belief in the big move, to either fend off or chase down another team, and Nats fans are left with only hope the Nats pull away, either because their talent takes off or the other team fails.
The Nats have World Series dreams and have adjusted their thinking in seasons where the playoffs are assured accordingly. Melancon, Doolittle/Kintzler/Madson. Kendrick. These are the moves of a serious team trying to fill in what remains of their gaps (with some measure of restraint). But to make the playoffs? The team has shown it does not have a plan for a playoff challenge and may never have one. The cost of adding enough talent to ensure (as much as is possible) a playoff spot being too high. The likelihood of changing playoff odds with smaller moves being too low to warrant spending any moderate amount. They will tinker. They may try to find a player a team is desperate to move. They will not commit. They will accept what the season throws at them and regroup for next year. This is their way.
Wednesday, October 03, 2018
Payroll vs Luxury Tax
The Nats roster for 2019 is a mystery right now. All we know is that the Nats would like to get under the luxury tax threshold for next year, which stands at 206 million. They wanted to do it this year but even with the sell-off couldn't quite make it so in January they will be paying a tax.
The tax they pay won't be a lot. Much like the U.S. income tax, you pay based on the money made in each bracket, not the overall amount you make. In baseball there are only two brackets, under and over, and the under pays no tax. The over pays an increasingly larger amount 20% then 30% then 50% depending on how many years they've been over in a row. It resets once you get back under. So for an example if the luxury tax threshold is 200 million and the amount of yours that counts against the luxury tax is 210 million and this is your first year over you would pay 2 million dollars
(210-200) * 0.20
If it was your second year you'd pay 3 million, if your third or more 5.
The Nats will barely squeak over the tax so even though this marks year number 2 going over they are going to pay 30% on some small number. A couple million over maybe so a few hundred thousand in taxes. A lot for us, not that much for the Lerners.
If it's not a lot why do the Lerners want to be under so badly? The WaPo covered this pretty well a few weeks ago. Money saved is money saved. You get that tax amount reset in case you want to spend more later. You get better compensation for free agents leaving. The system is set up to try to get teams not to spend much, and it works for the most part.
Where do the Nats stand for next year? The luxury tax is not as simple as the amount paid out because it includes numbers we aren't really privy to and it doesn't care about your deferred money. For most teams that's not going to be a big deal. For the Nats it's everything.
Let's take Scherzer's contract. He signed a 7 year deal for 210 million total. It wasn't just salary. It was 160 in salary and 50 million in signing bonuses. Salary has to be defined within the years of the contract and Scherzer's was 10, 15, 15, 15, 35, 35, 35. (2019 is the first 35 year). Even though they need to be defined like this they don't have to be paid like this and the Nats, as you know have deferred a bunch. Max's actual salaries are 10, 15, 15, 15, 0, 0, 0 (end of contract), 15, 15, 15, 15, 15, 15, 15. This would suggest that Max is getting paid nothing this year but that's not true. The contract stipulates the 50 million is to be paid out as such 5, 0, 0, 0, 15, 15, 15.
You can see here what the Nats did in effect. They gave Max a 15 million dollars a year for 14 years.
But neither the payroll (I guess for actual tax purposes) or the luxury tax sees it this way. For payroll Max is making what is defined in the contract - originally noted as 10, 15, 15, 15, 35, 35, 35, with the deferred amounts adjusted for reduced value** plus the 50 million spread out over those 7 years. that's 7+ million a year so it ends up being like 17, 22, 22, 22, 37+, 36, 34+
Luxury tax is easier as it has an equal value for each year. For Max's contract that would be 28.7 million. But as you may notice that 28.7 million times 7 years doesn't get you anything. Not the original value 210 million, nor the adjusted present-day value of like 190 million if you add up those payroll numbers. It's kind of like a half-way point between the two but I don't know. It uses a different methodology to calculate the annual salaries.
Anyway I'm getting in the weeds here. Max and Stras themselves cost like 54 million toward the luxury tax. Zimm and Eaton's AAV adds another 17. Doolittle himself, if I have this right, will throw in 6 million (the entirity of his option - which isn't factored into AAVs because it's not guaranteed) Kendrick 3.5. That's 80+. Arbitration guys - which include Rendon - add their annual salary about 30 million. Let's say 110. So do the pre-arb guys, another couple million. 112? Someting like that. Let's say 110-115. Then you factor in medical benefits (yep this is part of it and no I don't know exactly but 15 million is a conservative high-end guess) so 125-130 is set. The Nats have 75-80 million to spend for next year while still being under the threshold. Could you fit Bryce and other fixes? Yes.
If Bryce's AAV is 30 then you have another 45 or so to spend. But that adds up quick. A very good starting pitcher (think Kuechel or Corbin), a catcher (Grandal) and you are already at 35 ish without doing anything to a pen that's just Doolittle. Can you fix hat for 10 million? AND the Zimm back-up that costs you a few million each year the last two years but you definitely needed? You get really close. And the thing is - if you are close and you start picking people up at the trade deadline? Those costs come back at you. So if they want to be under AND want to have any flexibility for late season moves they have to stay a good 10 million under. This means Corbin-Grandal becomes Happ-LuCroy.
Assuming the bench and pen costs about 15 million to just fill with decent talent and you want that cushion you have 50-55 million to play around with to finish up this team. This is what the Nats are looking at going into the off-season.
*Why do a signing bonus instead of just paying him like this? I don't know. Some sort of tax thing probably.
** what does this mean? It means that MLB says - well given inflation you aren't paying him 105 over those last three years it's more like 87 - and if we adjust that for each year depending on when you pay them out exactly you get salaries of 30+, 28+, and 27+ so 10, 15, 15, 15, 30+, 28+, 27+
The tax they pay won't be a lot. Much like the U.S. income tax, you pay based on the money made in each bracket, not the overall amount you make. In baseball there are only two brackets, under and over, and the under pays no tax. The over pays an increasingly larger amount 20% then 30% then 50% depending on how many years they've been over in a row. It resets once you get back under. So for an example if the luxury tax threshold is 200 million and the amount of yours that counts against the luxury tax is 210 million and this is your first year over you would pay 2 million dollars
(210-200) * 0.20
If it was your second year you'd pay 3 million, if your third or more 5.
The Nats will barely squeak over the tax so even though this marks year number 2 going over they are going to pay 30% on some small number. A couple million over maybe so a few hundred thousand in taxes. A lot for us, not that much for the Lerners.
If it's not a lot why do the Lerners want to be under so badly? The WaPo covered this pretty well a few weeks ago. Money saved is money saved. You get that tax amount reset in case you want to spend more later. You get better compensation for free agents leaving. The system is set up to try to get teams not to spend much, and it works for the most part.
Where do the Nats stand for next year? The luxury tax is not as simple as the amount paid out because it includes numbers we aren't really privy to and it doesn't care about your deferred money. For most teams that's not going to be a big deal. For the Nats it's everything.
Let's take Scherzer's contract. He signed a 7 year deal for 210 million total. It wasn't just salary. It was 160 in salary and 50 million in signing bonuses. Salary has to be defined within the years of the contract and Scherzer's was 10, 15, 15, 15, 35, 35, 35. (2019 is the first 35 year). Even though they need to be defined like this they don't have to be paid like this and the Nats, as you know have deferred a bunch. Max's actual salaries are 10, 15, 15, 15, 0, 0, 0 (end of contract), 15, 15, 15, 15, 15, 15, 15. This would suggest that Max is getting paid nothing this year but that's not true. The contract stipulates the 50 million is to be paid out as such 5, 0, 0, 0, 15, 15, 15.
You can see here what the Nats did in effect. They gave Max a 15 million dollars a year for 14 years.
But neither the payroll (I guess for actual tax purposes) or the luxury tax sees it this way. For payroll Max is making what is defined in the contract - originally noted as 10, 15, 15, 15, 35, 35, 35, with the deferred amounts adjusted for reduced value** plus the 50 million spread out over those 7 years. that's 7+ million a year so it ends up being like 17, 22, 22, 22, 37+, 36, 34+
Luxury tax is easier as it has an equal value for each year. For Max's contract that would be 28.7 million. But as you may notice that 28.7 million times 7 years doesn't get you anything. Not the original value 210 million, nor the adjusted present-day value of like 190 million if you add up those payroll numbers. It's kind of like a half-way point between the two but I don't know. It uses a different methodology to calculate the annual salaries.
Anyway I'm getting in the weeds here. Max and Stras themselves cost like 54 million toward the luxury tax. Zimm and Eaton's AAV adds another 17. Doolittle himself, if I have this right, will throw in 6 million (the entirity of his option - which isn't factored into AAVs because it's not guaranteed) Kendrick 3.5. That's 80+. Arbitration guys - which include Rendon - add their annual salary about 30 million. Let's say 110. So do the pre-arb guys, another couple million. 112? Someting like that. Let's say 110-115. Then you factor in medical benefits (yep this is part of it and no I don't know exactly but 15 million is a conservative high-end guess) so 125-130 is set. The Nats have 75-80 million to spend for next year while still being under the threshold. Could you fit Bryce and other fixes? Yes.
If Bryce's AAV is 30 then you have another 45 or so to spend. But that adds up quick. A very good starting pitcher (think Kuechel or Corbin), a catcher (Grandal) and you are already at 35 ish without doing anything to a pen that's just Doolittle. Can you fix hat for 10 million? AND the Zimm back-up that costs you a few million each year the last two years but you definitely needed? You get really close. And the thing is - if you are close and you start picking people up at the trade deadline? Those costs come back at you. So if they want to be under AND want to have any flexibility for late season moves they have to stay a good 10 million under. This means Corbin-Grandal becomes Happ-LuCroy.
Assuming the bench and pen costs about 15 million to just fill with decent talent and you want that cushion you have 50-55 million to play around with to finish up this team. This is what the Nats are looking at going into the off-season.
*Why do a signing bonus instead of just paying him like this? I don't know. Some sort of tax thing probably.
** what does this mean? It means that MLB says - well given inflation you aren't paying him 105 over those last three years it's more like 87 - and if we adjust that for each year depending on when you pay them out exactly you get salaries of 30+, 28+, and 27+ so 10, 15, 15, 15, 30+, 28+, 27+
Tuesday, October 02, 2018
Lucky or Unlucky : 2018
We've gone over this before but every baseball season is a mix of things going right, things going wrong, and things going as expected. We predict our fortune based on some sort of equal breaking of the right and wrong, but that rarely happens. Instead the breaks are unequal in distribution and impact and your record reflects that. Let's see what I take away from the Nats in 2018
UNLUCKY
Murphy being out longer than anticipated - The plan was initially made with the expectation that Murphy would be back, if not at season's start, then soon after. But as the off-season shifted to Spring Training it became apparent it was going to be longer than that. Slow injury recovery is not in itself unlucky but when one month became two and Murphy didn't get back in until mid June that meant half a year of subpar Murphy.
Eaton out early - Eaton was supposed to be a spark plug at the top of the line-up but was lost for 2017 a month in. Finally back he picked up right where he left off... and then got hurt again. Key piece missing a big chunk of time again.
Kendrick goes down - Injuries matter but how much they matter differ. What's important is not just there's an injury but who, when, and how long. Kendrick was a key piece to the Nats providing coverage for multiple positions, specifically OF and 2B and when he went out relatively early in the season it created an issue because of the two injuries noted above. That was partially solved with Soto and partially not with Difo.
Doolittle, Kintzler, and Madson don't do what they are supposed to - this is a real tenuous unlucky because any group of three pitchers is going to have one likely get hurt or fail and we don't know how much of the failure here is the fault of Martinez's heavy usage (especially with Madson) but you'd kind of expect one to have a full very good year and the Nats didn't get that. Doolittle was very good, but hurt. Kintzler was ok, and hurt. Madson was not good and hurt.
LUCKY
Soto was more than ready - not much to explain here. He was forced into action and nearly won the ROY with possibly the best teenage season ever. You can't expect that. Short explanation for a big effect
Adams/Reynolds overperform - It was good planning to fill in the Zimm back-up role with quality players for the second straight year. But Adams, like Lind last year, was really good for most of the time, and Reynolds, who should have been just an ok fill in was better than that. Two for two here.
AS EXPECTED
Max, Stras, Tanner - Max is to the point where Cy Young seasons are expected. Stras is to the point where good, but injury abbreviated seasons are expected. Tanner downshifted his expectations with his 2017 and matched it this year.
Wieters/Severino/Kieboom is a mess - We knew, we all knew catcher would be pretty bad in 2017. Well maybe not those that fooled themselves about Severino but the rest of us. They didn't overachieve and were all below average. This was painful but expectedly so.
Zimm is good at the plate for half a year - Look at his games played over the past few years. Look at his offensive performance the past few years. Nothing about this year could be considered a surprise. At this point 100G of 110 OPS+ is what Zimm is. There's a lot of variability but this is the base.
Trea Turner isn't special - Last year you could be disappointed by Trea's average performance but you could also chalk it up to injury recovery. This year you probably secretly hoped for more but there wasn't anything there despite being healthy enough to play in all 162. Disappointing perhaps but not unlucky, not when what you are hanging your hat on is 70 games from 2 years ago. Now if you believe his defense suddenly became all-world then you might differ with this take but defensive stats are not meant to be annual and are iffy even in the 3 year view so I'm not going there
MAT is MAT - Look at MATs stats! LOOK AT THEM. THIS IS MAT. Low average, no walks, some pop, great D. In four of five seasons now he's been so remarkably consistent that expecting anything else would be insane going forward. Sure you might have hoped for more after last year's better numbers, but that hope should have been dashed when April produced MAT numbers again.
Deep bench depth was an issue - To be fair it's going to be an issue for most teams. You rarely go 25 deep. But Difo and anyone that needed to be called up bc of injury from AAA are barely major leaguers.
Pen depth beyond the three could be trouble - Lots of arms, but very little consistency or track record. There was a good chance most of them would flame out and most of them did. Did they find a decent arm here and there? Yep and that's expected too. Holland was very good in a brief spell. Miller was ok. Nothing here should surprise you. Why did it seem worse? Well they were supposed to compliment the top 3 but when those guys didn't hit their targets these guys became more important.
QUESTIONS
Bryce - unlucky? I wouldn't say so. The season was a little worse than expected. The problem was more timing than anything else. He has his crash right when the Nats were crashing everywhere else with injury returnees and Gio and Roark struggling. But is that unlucky? I lean more toward as expected but I leave it open
Gio - same goes for Gio here. On one hand he didn't pitch that much worse than would be expected if you follow his historical track. On the other hand there last year was better so does that raise your expectations enough that you feel his fall is unlucky? I don't know. I'll leave it open but you'd have a harder time convincing me that this wasn't in the expected category.
One thing you may see - the Nats didn't get that unlucky when it came to performance. They hit a lot of expectations mainly, and Soto covered a chunk of their unluckiness. So maybe you have them a couple games off of expectations. 90 to low 90s instead of low to mid 90s.
Why then were they so far off? Well unluckiness outside of player performance is one reason. The one-run game issue* cost them a few games (but only a few). The rebirth of the NL East with a .500 Phillies team and a good Braves squad cost them a few more. You can't plan for the former, and the Nats were hoping to have a year longer before the latter became an issue. They were wrong there. The Nats were a little unlucky this year but not nearly unlucky enough to explain the 83 win record.
*you know I like to look at 2 run games too just to see if there was a wild swing there that either countered or enhanced what happened with 1 run games. Nothing to speak of. 21-22. Pretty normal.
UNLUCKY
Murphy being out longer than anticipated - The plan was initially made with the expectation that Murphy would be back, if not at season's start, then soon after. But as the off-season shifted to Spring Training it became apparent it was going to be longer than that. Slow injury recovery is not in itself unlucky but when one month became two and Murphy didn't get back in until mid June that meant half a year of subpar Murphy.
Eaton out early - Eaton was supposed to be a spark plug at the top of the line-up but was lost for 2017 a month in. Finally back he picked up right where he left off... and then got hurt again. Key piece missing a big chunk of time again.
Kendrick goes down - Injuries matter but how much they matter differ. What's important is not just there's an injury but who, when, and how long. Kendrick was a key piece to the Nats providing coverage for multiple positions, specifically OF and 2B and when he went out relatively early in the season it created an issue because of the two injuries noted above. That was partially solved with Soto and partially not with Difo.
Doolittle, Kintzler, and Madson don't do what they are supposed to - this is a real tenuous unlucky because any group of three pitchers is going to have one likely get hurt or fail and we don't know how much of the failure here is the fault of Martinez's heavy usage (especially with Madson) but you'd kind of expect one to have a full very good year and the Nats didn't get that. Doolittle was very good, but hurt. Kintzler was ok, and hurt. Madson was not good and hurt.
LUCKY
Soto was more than ready - not much to explain here. He was forced into action and nearly won the ROY with possibly the best teenage season ever. You can't expect that. Short explanation for a big effect
Adams/Reynolds overperform - It was good planning to fill in the Zimm back-up role with quality players for the second straight year. But Adams, like Lind last year, was really good for most of the time, and Reynolds, who should have been just an ok fill in was better than that. Two for two here.
AS EXPECTED
Max, Stras, Tanner - Max is to the point where Cy Young seasons are expected. Stras is to the point where good, but injury abbreviated seasons are expected. Tanner downshifted his expectations with his 2017 and matched it this year.
Wieters/Severino/Kieboom is a mess - We knew, we all knew catcher would be pretty bad in 2017. Well maybe not those that fooled themselves about Severino but the rest of us. They didn't overachieve and were all below average. This was painful but expectedly so.
Zimm is good at the plate for half a year - Look at his games played over the past few years. Look at his offensive performance the past few years. Nothing about this year could be considered a surprise. At this point 100G of 110 OPS+ is what Zimm is. There's a lot of variability but this is the base.
Trea Turner isn't special - Last year you could be disappointed by Trea's average performance but you could also chalk it up to injury recovery. This year you probably secretly hoped for more but there wasn't anything there despite being healthy enough to play in all 162. Disappointing perhaps but not unlucky, not when what you are hanging your hat on is 70 games from 2 years ago. Now if you believe his defense suddenly became all-world then you might differ with this take but defensive stats are not meant to be annual and are iffy even in the 3 year view so I'm not going there
MAT is MAT - Look at MATs stats! LOOK AT THEM. THIS IS MAT. Low average, no walks, some pop, great D. In four of five seasons now he's been so remarkably consistent that expecting anything else would be insane going forward. Sure you might have hoped for more after last year's better numbers, but that hope should have been dashed when April produced MAT numbers again.
Deep bench depth was an issue - To be fair it's going to be an issue for most teams. You rarely go 25 deep. But Difo and anyone that needed to be called up bc of injury from AAA are barely major leaguers.
Pen depth beyond the three could be trouble - Lots of arms, but very little consistency or track record. There was a good chance most of them would flame out and most of them did. Did they find a decent arm here and there? Yep and that's expected too. Holland was very good in a brief spell. Miller was ok. Nothing here should surprise you. Why did it seem worse? Well they were supposed to compliment the top 3 but when those guys didn't hit their targets these guys became more important.
QUESTIONS
Bryce - unlucky? I wouldn't say so. The season was a little worse than expected. The problem was more timing than anything else. He has his crash right when the Nats were crashing everywhere else with injury returnees and Gio and Roark struggling. But is that unlucky? I lean more toward as expected but I leave it open
Gio - same goes for Gio here. On one hand he didn't pitch that much worse than would be expected if you follow his historical track. On the other hand there last year was better so does that raise your expectations enough that you feel his fall is unlucky? I don't know. I'll leave it open but you'd have a harder time convincing me that this wasn't in the expected category.
One thing you may see - the Nats didn't get that unlucky when it came to performance. They hit a lot of expectations mainly, and Soto covered a chunk of their unluckiness. So maybe you have them a couple games off of expectations. 90 to low 90s instead of low to mid 90s.
Why then were they so far off? Well unluckiness outside of player performance is one reason. The one-run game issue* cost them a few games (but only a few). The rebirth of the NL East with a .500 Phillies team and a good Braves squad cost them a few more. You can't plan for the former, and the Nats were hoping to have a year longer before the latter became an issue. They were wrong there. The Nats were a little unlucky this year but not nearly unlucky enough to explain the 83 win record.
*you know I like to look at 2 run games too just to see if there was a wild swing there that either countered or enhanced what happened with 1 run games. Nothing to speak of. 21-22. Pretty normal.
Monday, October 01, 2018
Monday Quickie : The Coin Flip Team
Going into 2012 the Nats were hoping to compete for the playoffs and figure out what next steps would be needed to become a true contender. Instead they ran away with a division title and began a window where they started with a young, cheap, and talented team and could use that to set up move after move. Yesterday, the last of the underpaid and overperforming 2012 squad officially moved into free agency as Bryce Harper played his last game under Nationals control.
We can quibble about Bryce's worth and what he should be paid going forward but it's undeniable that even in his worst seasons he's been underpaid. That gap, between production and payment, is something the Nats have used over the course of 7 seasons to help shore up other positions without spending like the biggest of spenders.
Of course the Nationals have found other young players during this time that will help them in the same way. It would be almost impossible not to. But the discovery has been more typically staggered. Rendon and Roark who will enter free agency after next season. Trea Turner who will be under control thorugh 2022. Robles through 2023. Soto perhaps further than that. There is no great en masse set of talent that was Ramos, Espinosa, Desmond, Bryce, ZNN, Strasburg, Detwiler, Clippard, Stammen, Storen. The Nats are now a typical major league team.
If you look at the record that may suggest bad things for the Nats, because even with that core of talent to plan around the Nats only made the playoffs 3 out of the next 6 years. It's one thing to believe in the 90s-00s Braves method of success, of getting in the playoffs year after year and hoping that you catch a break, it's another to make it work. The Nats didn't. Not only that but they failed in almost ideal circumstances with a division that featured only 4 above .500 teams during this same time frame, easily last in baseball. Little competition. Perfect set-up. While it's hard to say the results are disappointing, it's easy to say that you expected more.
What's next? It feels like the Nats only have one decision to make but actually they have more to deal with than just Bryce's departure. Doolittle's got a team option - 6 million for next year - we assume they'll pick that up as he is almost certain to be worth it. Wieters, Holland, Herrera, Hellickson and Benoit all are FAs. It's not anything the Nats are likely to worry about losing in general but those are guys whose existence needs to be replaced. It's also places, 5th starter, bullpen, catcher, where the internal solutions do not look satisfactory.
But while there are many decisions to make, they do probably hinge on that first one, which is why the Nats need to decide what they want to do with Bryce's contract sooner rather than later. They need to get to the Winter Meetings (early December) with a very strong idea if Bryce is coming back or not, so they can wheel and deal around that decision. Barring getting swept off their feet, Boras will likely hold off Bryce making any sort of deal at the very least until after the playoffs are over and all teams can bid. That means the Nats have a month to get their ducks in a row. It should start with a competitive offer now if they mean to keep him. Doesn't have to be "best and final" at this point, but something that shows the area the Nats are willing to go. If that's outright rejected as not even close then maybe you don't give up (the market may give you a chance you don't think you have) but you start planning with Bryce as your Plan B, not Plan A.
We'll start this week doing the off-season position discussions, maybe a look at how luck factored into this season, take a look at the salary cap/payroll as well.
We can quibble about Bryce's worth and what he should be paid going forward but it's undeniable that even in his worst seasons he's been underpaid. That gap, between production and payment, is something the Nats have used over the course of 7 seasons to help shore up other positions without spending like the biggest of spenders.
Of course the Nationals have found other young players during this time that will help them in the same way. It would be almost impossible not to. But the discovery has been more typically staggered. Rendon and Roark who will enter free agency after next season. Trea Turner who will be under control thorugh 2022. Robles through 2023. Soto perhaps further than that. There is no great en masse set of talent that was Ramos, Espinosa, Desmond, Bryce, ZNN, Strasburg, Detwiler, Clippard, Stammen, Storen. The Nats are now a typical major league team.
If you look at the record that may suggest bad things for the Nats, because even with that core of talent to plan around the Nats only made the playoffs 3 out of the next 6 years. It's one thing to believe in the 90s-00s Braves method of success, of getting in the playoffs year after year and hoping that you catch a break, it's another to make it work. The Nats didn't. Not only that but they failed in almost ideal circumstances with a division that featured only 4 above .500 teams during this same time frame, easily last in baseball. Little competition. Perfect set-up. While it's hard to say the results are disappointing, it's easy to say that you expected more.
What's next? It feels like the Nats only have one decision to make but actually they have more to deal with than just Bryce's departure. Doolittle's got a team option - 6 million for next year - we assume they'll pick that up as he is almost certain to be worth it. Wieters, Holland, Herrera, Hellickson and Benoit all are FAs. It's not anything the Nats are likely to worry about losing in general but those are guys whose existence needs to be replaced. It's also places, 5th starter, bullpen, catcher, where the internal solutions do not look satisfactory.
But while there are many decisions to make, they do probably hinge on that first one, which is why the Nats need to decide what they want to do with Bryce's contract sooner rather than later. They need to get to the Winter Meetings (early December) with a very strong idea if Bryce is coming back or not, so they can wheel and deal around that decision. Barring getting swept off their feet, Boras will likely hold off Bryce making any sort of deal at the very least until after the playoffs are over and all teams can bid. That means the Nats have a month to get their ducks in a row. It should start with a competitive offer now if they mean to keep him. Doesn't have to be "best and final" at this point, but something that shows the area the Nats are willing to go. If that's outright rejected as not even close then maybe you don't give up (the market may give you a chance you don't think you have) but you start planning with Bryce as your Plan B, not Plan A.
We'll start this week doing the off-season position discussions, maybe a look at how luck factored into this season, take a look at the salary cap/payroll as well.
Friday, September 28, 2018
Bryce ruminations
It's hard to quantify Bryce. I've think there is some underestimation of what Bryce is by both the non-Nats fan public and the online Nats fan. The non-Nats fan public takes a glance at the stats, the lack of playoff wins, remembers the hype and the very early "attitude" problems, and calls the whole thing disappointing. The online Nats fan, understands better what should be dismissed about the above, but they tend to be a little too dismissive about his impact off the field.*
Bryce is someone that loves the spotlight and does well in it. He is the touchstone for the team, especially the younger and casual fans. His personality is admittedly rather bland when you get him down to interview, but despite that he's able to be sold as some sort of bad boy basher because he has that X-Factor.
Rendon might have been just as important but leans away from it. Zimmerman is the long time face and probably only a little blander in interviews, but just doesn't have "it" (see: Trout, Mike). Max is great, but Max you see only every 5 days. Doolittle is pretty good, but hasn't been here long enough to have a deep following and might be right back out that door after next year. Soto, Robles, and Turner, while talented, haven't shown any sellable spark yet.
But Bryce is not the end all be all. He hasn't come through every year, often hobbled by injuries turning a team-carrying superstar into a mere star. He's had big playoff moments but because of the same tendency to get injured has rarely been able to have the impact you think he should. He's ALMOST the player he was expected to be, the generational talent that could define great offense for the next 15 years, but he's not that. Instead he's a guy that's continually on the precipice of that. A season here, a half-season there. And because of his age that still works, but it won't for much longer.
That last statement is what makes signing Bryce different than your typical free agent. Bryce is still only 25. He's half a year younger than Wilmer Difo. Here are the Nats in 2018 that had at bats that are more than a year younger than Bryce : Juan Soto, Victor Robles, Andrew Stevenson. Here are the pitchers that threw a pitch for the Nats this year that are more than a year younger than Bryce :
That's no mistake - there aren't any. Bryce is still young. Not very young, but young and that means his future is still a future. The fact that he's had so much experience by now makes it a pretty clear future but there is still room for change and growth. But the primary selling point is not improvement, it's that the fear of non-injury based decline anywhere in the plannable future - even out to 5 years, is minimal. That is rare in a long-term signing.
What is clear is if he's healthy he's an All-Star plus caliber offensive player. What's not clear is how he fits into a defense scheme and if, in fact, he can stay healthy.
I don't know exactly what to do here. Bryce has the ability to be a singular player, but as we've seen with the Angels, a singular player by himself, even the best one, cannot get a team to the playoffs himself. That's not how baseball works. So if you are betting on Bryce, signing him and bringing him back, you aren't just betting on Bryce. You are betting on your own ability to build a winning team around him with the remaining funds available.** For the Nats that may be only 10-15 million more in 2019 if you sign him. Can you do that? The Nats have been able to do build a winner with less money than that but that was when they found themselves with 3-4 underpaid starting pitchers and 3-4 underpaid starting offensive players for 4-5 years. Now they have a similar base of offensive players - maybe even better if both Robles and Soto hit - but possibly no underpaid starting pitchers. Is the best move going forward putting that much money into the offense?
That's the crux. The Nats going forward likely can be good enough offensively to win already, at least in 2019. They may not be able to be good enough on the mound. Do you double down on the more reliable offense, and sign the team defining player, or do you try to throw money at the more variable issue in pitching? They arguably tried the latter this year, ignoring a hole at catcher and buying into the pen. That didn't work. And if you do choose the offense there's even a choice. Do you build around Bryce as part of your core for the next four years, or bet on being able to do it with Rendon - the more reliable strong defender with a bat but who's older and has no real interest in being marketed?
I'll say this - signing Bryce will not be the wrong move. He's a great offensive player that makes a team better. The Nats may follow it up with other wrong moves and fail to win. Or they may follow it up with no moves and fail and blame budget, but that's on them, not on Bryce. It's never a mistake to sign a good player.
*The online fans are right in their overall point, though. It's winning that drives the bus for attendance. Bryce may help boost it, but he's the finishing touch, not the main ingredient.
**Really in a sense you are betting on your ability to build a winning team around 90 million for Bryce, Max, and Stras - assuming Stras stays.
Bryce is someone that loves the spotlight and does well in it. He is the touchstone for the team, especially the younger and casual fans. His personality is admittedly rather bland when you get him down to interview, but despite that he's able to be sold as some sort of bad boy basher because he has that X-Factor.
Rendon might have been just as important but leans away from it. Zimmerman is the long time face and probably only a little blander in interviews, but just doesn't have "it" (see: Trout, Mike). Max is great, but Max you see only every 5 days. Doolittle is pretty good, but hasn't been here long enough to have a deep following and might be right back out that door after next year. Soto, Robles, and Turner, while talented, haven't shown any sellable spark yet.
But Bryce is not the end all be all. He hasn't come through every year, often hobbled by injuries turning a team-carrying superstar into a mere star. He's had big playoff moments but because of the same tendency to get injured has rarely been able to have the impact you think he should. He's ALMOST the player he was expected to be, the generational talent that could define great offense for the next 15 years, but he's not that. Instead he's a guy that's continually on the precipice of that. A season here, a half-season there. And because of his age that still works, but it won't for much longer.
That last statement is what makes signing Bryce different than your typical free agent. Bryce is still only 25. He's half a year younger than Wilmer Difo. Here are the Nats in 2018 that had at bats that are more than a year younger than Bryce : Juan Soto, Victor Robles, Andrew Stevenson. Here are the pitchers that threw a pitch for the Nats this year that are more than a year younger than Bryce :
That's no mistake - there aren't any. Bryce is still young. Not very young, but young and that means his future is still a future. The fact that he's had so much experience by now makes it a pretty clear future but there is still room for change and growth. But the primary selling point is not improvement, it's that the fear of non-injury based decline anywhere in the plannable future - even out to 5 years, is minimal. That is rare in a long-term signing.
What is clear is if he's healthy he's an All-Star plus caliber offensive player. What's not clear is how he fits into a defense scheme and if, in fact, he can stay healthy.
I don't know exactly what to do here. Bryce has the ability to be a singular player, but as we've seen with the Angels, a singular player by himself, even the best one, cannot get a team to the playoffs himself. That's not how baseball works. So if you are betting on Bryce, signing him and bringing him back, you aren't just betting on Bryce. You are betting on your own ability to build a winning team around him with the remaining funds available.** For the Nats that may be only 10-15 million more in 2019 if you sign him. Can you do that? The Nats have been able to do build a winner with less money than that but that was when they found themselves with 3-4 underpaid starting pitchers and 3-4 underpaid starting offensive players for 4-5 years. Now they have a similar base of offensive players - maybe even better if both Robles and Soto hit - but possibly no underpaid starting pitchers. Is the best move going forward putting that much money into the offense?
That's the crux. The Nats going forward likely can be good enough offensively to win already, at least in 2019. They may not be able to be good enough on the mound. Do you double down on the more reliable offense, and sign the team defining player, or do you try to throw money at the more variable issue in pitching? They arguably tried the latter this year, ignoring a hole at catcher and buying into the pen. That didn't work. And if you do choose the offense there's even a choice. Do you build around Bryce as part of your core for the next four years, or bet on being able to do it with Rendon - the more reliable strong defender with a bat but who's older and has no real interest in being marketed?
I'll say this - signing Bryce will not be the wrong move. He's a great offensive player that makes a team better. The Nats may follow it up with other wrong moves and fail to win. Or they may follow it up with no moves and fail and blame budget, but that's on them, not on Bryce. It's never a mistake to sign a good player.
*The online fans are right in their overall point, though. It's winning that drives the bus for attendance. Bryce may help boost it, but he's the finishing touch, not the main ingredient.
**Really in a sense you are betting on your ability to build a winning team around 90 million for Bryce, Max, and Stras - assuming Stras stays.
Wednesday, September 26, 2018
First go at it
How you feel about the Nats and Bryce depends a lot on your outlook on the Nats.
The future is limited
Scherzer is 34 next year and time has to eventually come for him. Strasburg is 30, remains an injury risk, and has opt outs after 2019 and 2020. Rendon, who's like the secret key to the team could leave after next season as well. The Braves arrived a year early and the Phillies almost did. One or both of them are going to build teams for the next 5 years. The Nats need to focus on these next two years, when a semblance of the teams that brought them four playoff trips remain.
The future is mushy
The pitching doesn't look great down the road but Robles and Soto are here now and with Rendon and the other offensive weapons the Nats could remain playoff competitive with just a few tweaks. Sure in a few years the Nats could be out of pitching, but 3 years is forever in baseball time so we shouldn't assume that. We also saw the Mets rise up and fall out of contention so while we should be wary about the Braves and Phillies we shouldn't assume they'll be contenders for years.
The future is bright
This team missed out on the playoffs because of bad luck and injuries. Next year they'll be right back in the hunt Bryce or no Bryce. The Braves have shown they are nothing special and the Phillies aren't even a .500 team after all this. Soto and Robles set-up a core through the middle of next decade that they can pretty easily find a way to build around in an NL East who's quality remains murky at best.
Which one are you?
Here's a fun exercise :
30 Million - Bryce
20 Million - Corbin
12 Million - Grandal
12 Million - Happ
5 Million - Random Reliable Reliever A
5 Million - Random Reliable Reliever B
You have 40 million or so to spend for next year after margin work. Make no assumptions on length of deal. You can lose Eaton's 8.5 Million in a trade if you sign Harper but at most that trade brings in one of those random reliable relievers. Go.
The future is limited
Scherzer is 34 next year and time has to eventually come for him. Strasburg is 30, remains an injury risk, and has opt outs after 2019 and 2020. Rendon, who's like the secret key to the team could leave after next season as well. The Braves arrived a year early and the Phillies almost did. One or both of them are going to build teams for the next 5 years. The Nats need to focus on these next two years, when a semblance of the teams that brought them four playoff trips remain.
The future is mushy
The pitching doesn't look great down the road but Robles and Soto are here now and with Rendon and the other offensive weapons the Nats could remain playoff competitive with just a few tweaks. Sure in a few years the Nats could be out of pitching, but 3 years is forever in baseball time so we shouldn't assume that. We also saw the Mets rise up and fall out of contention so while we should be wary about the Braves and Phillies we shouldn't assume they'll be contenders for years.
The future is bright
This team missed out on the playoffs because of bad luck and injuries. Next year they'll be right back in the hunt Bryce or no Bryce. The Braves have shown they are nothing special and the Phillies aren't even a .500 team after all this. Soto and Robles set-up a core through the middle of next decade that they can pretty easily find a way to build around in an NL East who's quality remains murky at best.
Which one are you?
Here's a fun exercise :
30 Million - Bryce
20 Million - Corbin
12 Million - Grandal
12 Million - Happ
5 Million - Random Reliable Reliever A
5 Million - Random Reliable Reliever B
You have 40 million or so to spend for next year after margin work. Make no assumptions on length of deal. You can lose Eaton's 8.5 Million in a trade if you sign Harper but at most that trade brings in one of those random reliable relievers. Go.
Monday, September 24, 2018
Monday Quickie - Officially official
The Nats were officially eliminated from the playoffs this weekend. To give you an idea of how the math plays with fans hopes think about that for a second. You could have honestly started arguing the Nats were out of the playoffs for months now, but only this past weekend did it become actually impossible. Crazy. You'd think these things get decided a lot earlier but since we allow for "one team wins every game, other team loses every game" scenarios you almost always make it to the point where the games left to play equal the games behind. Odds help put the chances in better context but still possible means possible and some fans are always going to hold onto that. And why not? We've now got 5 months of no winning baseball to get through. Why make it 7?
Anyway here's your CY and ROY updates
CY
Max : 17-7 2.57 213.2 IP 0.917 WHIP, 2.1 BB/9, 12.2 K/9, 290 K overall
DeGrom : 9-9 1.77 209 IP, 0.938 WHIP, 2.0 BB/9, 11.2 K/9, 259 K
Max had an off game and frankly has had an off finish to 2018. In his last 5 starts he's posting an ERA over 5.00. Even throwing that in though, he's pitched as well this year as last, and he's going to throw 20 more innings. It's a Cy Young worthy season. The problem is, of course, that there's a slightly better season sitting out there in deGrom who has a touch fewer Ks but doesn't give up the homer a game like Max does. The crux ends up being what would you rather have over the course of four games - 37 Ks but 3 homers, or 34 Ks and 1 home run. That's a trade you make every time. Max's hope comes down to getting to 300Ks and deGrom just blowing completely up with a 7 run 1.2 inning type outing. The former is a good bet on happening. The latter is extremely unlikely.
ROY
Soto : .293 / .405 / .509 20HR, 72R, 65RBI, 5 SB
Acuna : .289 / .364 / .561 26HR, 77R, 58RBI, 15 SB
Is it done? I'm not going to say that. The talent we're dealing with here for both players is the type that can have a week where they hit .500 and blast out 6 homers. Soto does that while Acuna struggles and that last impression maybe puts him over the top. However failing that Soto is out. After getting back in the race by topping Acuna in the H2H series, Soto has had a terrible time. He's gone 2 for 23 with no walks and 5 Ks. Acuna hasn't been great but this drop off erased all the good Soto did in those Braves games.
What's interesting in this final week now that the Nats are done? Well, I mentioned at some point that the scheduling gods haven't been kind to us to end the year. We'd like this last week to have MIL/CHC, LAD/COL, NYY/OAK, maybe even ATL/CHC but we get none of those. Nearly all teams still in an interesting spot are not facing off directly. The best bet for a singularly interesting game is the Brewers and Cardinals who face off to start the week. For neither team is WC HFA the biggest deal. The Brewers are hoping to catch the Cubs for the Central title. The Cardinals have to worry about missing out on the playoffs entirely if the Rockies catch them. But in the end they are still battling for something and if the Cardinals win Game 1 that'll be the big deal for the rest of the series. Ending the season the Cardinals Cubs might play out to be interesting but more likely it won't. If we get one chase still around by Friday I'll be happy.
Anyway here's your CY and ROY updates
CY
Max : 17-7 2.57 213.2 IP 0.917 WHIP, 2.1 BB/9, 12.2 K/9, 290 K overall
DeGrom : 9-9 1.77 209 IP, 0.938 WHIP, 2.0 BB/9, 11.2 K/9, 259 K
Max had an off game and frankly has had an off finish to 2018. In his last 5 starts he's posting an ERA over 5.00. Even throwing that in though, he's pitched as well this year as last, and he's going to throw 20 more innings. It's a Cy Young worthy season. The problem is, of course, that there's a slightly better season sitting out there in deGrom who has a touch fewer Ks but doesn't give up the homer a game like Max does. The crux ends up being what would you rather have over the course of four games - 37 Ks but 3 homers, or 34 Ks and 1 home run. That's a trade you make every time. Max's hope comes down to getting to 300Ks and deGrom just blowing completely up with a 7 run 1.2 inning type outing. The former is a good bet on happening. The latter is extremely unlikely.
ROY
Soto : .293 / .405 / .509 20HR, 72R, 65RBI, 5 SB
Acuna : .289 / .364 / .561 26HR, 77R, 58RBI, 15 SB
Is it done? I'm not going to say that. The talent we're dealing with here for both players is the type that can have a week where they hit .500 and blast out 6 homers. Soto does that while Acuna struggles and that last impression maybe puts him over the top. However failing that Soto is out. After getting back in the race by topping Acuna in the H2H series, Soto has had a terrible time. He's gone 2 for 23 with no walks and 5 Ks. Acuna hasn't been great but this drop off erased all the good Soto did in those Braves games.
What's interesting in this final week now that the Nats are done? Well, I mentioned at some point that the scheduling gods haven't been kind to us to end the year. We'd like this last week to have MIL/CHC, LAD/COL, NYY/OAK, maybe even ATL/CHC but we get none of those. Nearly all teams still in an interesting spot are not facing off directly. The best bet for a singularly interesting game is the Brewers and Cardinals who face off to start the week. For neither team is WC HFA the biggest deal. The Brewers are hoping to catch the Cubs for the Central title. The Cardinals have to worry about missing out on the playoffs entirely if the Rockies catch them. But in the end they are still battling for something and if the Cardinals win Game 1 that'll be the big deal for the rest of the series. Ending the season the Cardinals Cubs might play out to be interesting but more likely it won't. If we get one chase still around by Friday I'll be happy.
Thursday, September 20, 2018
Can the Nats develop starting pitching?
It was a point brought up in the comments yesterday, but that wasn't the first time. It seems like people believe the Nats can't develop starting pitching. My off the cuff thoughts are yes they have had problems with it, though I'm not sure how that relates to other teams. And that a good part of the reason why is how they draft. The "go big or go home" draft strategy of picking risks to get value IF they get right has been the culprit lately. Be it Giolito and Fedde facing injury or Seth Romero and his head. But that's just my off the cuff take.
It's kind of hard to measure this because "develop starting pitching" isn't an easy thing to gauge. Sure you draft someone, bring him up in the minors, and he starts multiple years for your team is a success point. But what if you draft someone, bring him up in the minors, and then trade him away where he finds success as a starter? Or if you trade for someone in the minors and he becomes a multi-year starter for you? And what if there's a trade inbetween, who gets credti? And how long after leaving your team is it about your team? 2 years? 5? What about starters you trade for and get better for you? Does that matter?
We gotta set some limits so For now I'm going to say you get credit for a pitcher developing if he pitched A ball and AA ball for you OR he pitched a rough season worth of AA ball. So this cuts out maybe an almost ready prospect you sit in AA for a half a year before moving him up. I'd also give credit to the last team to have these qualifications so if you got him to AA but he pitched one more AA years for someone else, that's their guy. I also set the limit off your team at 2 years. If he's been gone for 3 years and hasn't been an impactful starter that's not on you. This is all imperfect and we can talk about it.
Now we're going to look at the Rizzo time frame and I set it at 2011 because (1) he took over fully in 2009 and (2) it takes a couple years to get guys going. How many pitchers have pitched at least two full seasons of baseball?*
There have been quite a lot - 185 pitchers to be exact. But I realize this includes a lot of old guys - Hey Roy Halladay you don't count here - so I then set the limit to guys who are pitching one of their first 8 seasons in here. That isn't perfect because you are getting guys who may have season 8 in 2011 but it'll whittle out some we don't care about and we're down to 149. We can probably put an age limit on it too. Like most pitchers would start by 25? so 33... let's say 34 to be conservative. 147 that didn't do much.
OK well evenly distributed that would be like 5 a team. Who here was developed by the Nats? I'm pretty good with memory stuff so I think I can get them all. First off there's Jordan Zimmerman, with 5 such years. Nationals born and bred.Then there's Roark and Strasburg with 4. Roark, you know was a trade get. I thought he was a A ball guy but he was a AA when the Nats got him. Still he pitched a season-plus in AA for the Nats, so under my rules up there he goes to the Nats. Strasburg was of course a drafted and developed talent.
Now these all happened a while ago, ZNN debuted in 2009, Stras in 2010, Roark in 2013 but I'm going down the list from most of these years to least. Older guys have more time to hit this criteria so this end should skew older debuts. Let's keep going.
I don't see any Nats with 3 such years. How about 2? OK I see Nick Pivetta's name... he did reach AA with the Nats so they would get him but 29 starts in AA... that's enough to give the Phillies credit under my rules. So no Nick.
Robbie Ray! OK here's a classic tough case. He did reach AA with the Nats. He was traded and pitched in the majors the next year but was bad. Was dealt again and was good. So he both reached the majors and pitched well in the majors within the 2 year limit. he also spent very little time in the minors outside of the Nats. This looks like the Nats get Robbie Ray. 2014 first appearance.
And hey there's Tommy Milone! A middling pitcher to be sure but a usable starter for a couple of seasons. No doubt about it - a guy they Nats drafted and brought up to be a starter. 2011 first appearance.
So the Nats have developed 5 starters in this time frame which works out to be completely average. While you can debate whether Milone was good enough to want to take credit for - the other four were at least good if not very good. I'm not going to argue with the fact they developed starters. But of course it's not a steady drip. The debuts weren't 2009 2011 2013 2015, and 2017. They were 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, and 2014. There's a distinct older skew here. If they are average now, the Nats had been really good at developing starters, but since have fallen off.
Now this leads to another point. Perhaps the Nats didn't develop starters because they didn't need them at the time. ZNN, Stras, Gio, Roark, Fister, Max... they literally forced Roark out in 2015. That's going to force some skewing to be sure.
But Fister was gone by 2016 and ZNN left then too. The Nats have needed pitchers. There's been space since. How many guys have had at least one full year in the past 3 seasons? How many of those have been Nats?
Cut down to 22 starts (to account for rest of 2018) I'm going to get a handful more guys in here. And let's make it through 4th season since we're looking for guys the Nats have developed for this new time of need. There have been 88 pitchers with at least one full year here. We would expect 3 Nats. Ray's in here - but just barely (get's his 3rd and 4th seasons in 16-17) that's not what we're looking for. With one year we see both Reynaldo Lopez and Lucas Giolito**. They were both Nats developed. Both debuted in 2016. And... that's it. So a little under expectation but not much.
So this quick stroll through the pitchers in the league would seem to suggest the Nats are not bad at developing starting pitchers. Average over the course of the time frame we are looking at. Maybe a little skewed toward the past but still mostly able to develop full-time major league talent for 2018. Given that the latest three who have become full-time starters (Ray, Lopez, and Giolito) were all dealt I'd say the problem recently is less development and more identifications of the ones to keep and the ones to let go. Maybe a problem identifying who are the real injury risks and who are minor ones.
Of course there's a lot of hemming and hawing up there so have at the methods of this.
*And what's a "full season" I mean literally it would be 32/33 starts but I set the limit at 25. See! There's a lot of lines that have to be drawn for this analysis. And what if they aren't GOOD seasons? You should get more credit for the good, right? And what's development and what's just drafting? Lots of questions!
**How are they doing? Lopez has had an EXCELLENT September. 1 ER in 3 starts, 22K and 4 BB. Best he's pitched all year, balancing out his terrible July to give his year proper representation in the final stats. Which is to say he's been perfectly fine as a blah 3 or good 4. Giolito's gone the other way, with a terrible September so far. Knocked out early by Detroit and knocked around by Baltimore. Walks, which plagued him, aren't too bad but strikeouts almost gone with it. His numbers now 5.77 capture his year, too which is a roller coaster with a few mild highs and a lot of real low lows. He's a guy that starts as a 5th starter in 2019. For both guys 2019 is going to be where their careers are set likely.
It's kind of hard to measure this because "develop starting pitching" isn't an easy thing to gauge. Sure you draft someone, bring him up in the minors, and he starts multiple years for your team is a success point. But what if you draft someone, bring him up in the minors, and then trade him away where he finds success as a starter? Or if you trade for someone in the minors and he becomes a multi-year starter for you? And what if there's a trade inbetween, who gets credti? And how long after leaving your team is it about your team? 2 years? 5? What about starters you trade for and get better for you? Does that matter?
We gotta set some limits so For now I'm going to say you get credit for a pitcher developing if he pitched A ball and AA ball for you OR he pitched a rough season worth of AA ball. So this cuts out maybe an almost ready prospect you sit in AA for a half a year before moving him up. I'd also give credit to the last team to have these qualifications so if you got him to AA but he pitched one more AA years for someone else, that's their guy. I also set the limit off your team at 2 years. If he's been gone for 3 years and hasn't been an impactful starter that's not on you. This is all imperfect and we can talk about it.
Now we're going to look at the Rizzo time frame and I set it at 2011 because (1) he took over fully in 2009 and (2) it takes a couple years to get guys going. How many pitchers have pitched at least two full seasons of baseball?*
There have been quite a lot - 185 pitchers to be exact. But I realize this includes a lot of old guys - Hey Roy Halladay you don't count here - so I then set the limit to guys who are pitching one of their first 8 seasons in here. That isn't perfect because you are getting guys who may have season 8 in 2011 but it'll whittle out some we don't care about and we're down to 149. We can probably put an age limit on it too. Like most pitchers would start by 25? so 33... let's say 34 to be conservative. 147 that didn't do much.
OK well evenly distributed that would be like 5 a team. Who here was developed by the Nats? I'm pretty good with memory stuff so I think I can get them all. First off there's Jordan Zimmerman, with 5 such years. Nationals born and bred.Then there's Roark and Strasburg with 4. Roark, you know was a trade get. I thought he was a A ball guy but he was a AA when the Nats got him. Still he pitched a season-plus in AA for the Nats, so under my rules up there he goes to the Nats. Strasburg was of course a drafted and developed talent.
Now these all happened a while ago, ZNN debuted in 2009, Stras in 2010, Roark in 2013 but I'm going down the list from most of these years to least. Older guys have more time to hit this criteria so this end should skew older debuts. Let's keep going.
I don't see any Nats with 3 such years. How about 2? OK I see Nick Pivetta's name... he did reach AA with the Nats so they would get him but 29 starts in AA... that's enough to give the Phillies credit under my rules. So no Nick.
Robbie Ray! OK here's a classic tough case. He did reach AA with the Nats. He was traded and pitched in the majors the next year but was bad. Was dealt again and was good. So he both reached the majors and pitched well in the majors within the 2 year limit. he also spent very little time in the minors outside of the Nats. This looks like the Nats get Robbie Ray. 2014 first appearance.
And hey there's Tommy Milone! A middling pitcher to be sure but a usable starter for a couple of seasons. No doubt about it - a guy they Nats drafted and brought up to be a starter. 2011 first appearance.
So the Nats have developed 5 starters in this time frame which works out to be completely average. While you can debate whether Milone was good enough to want to take credit for - the other four were at least good if not very good. I'm not going to argue with the fact they developed starters. But of course it's not a steady drip. The debuts weren't 2009 2011 2013 2015, and 2017. They were 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, and 2014. There's a distinct older skew here. If they are average now, the Nats had been really good at developing starters, but since have fallen off.
Now this leads to another point. Perhaps the Nats didn't develop starters because they didn't need them at the time. ZNN, Stras, Gio, Roark, Fister, Max... they literally forced Roark out in 2015. That's going to force some skewing to be sure.
But Fister was gone by 2016 and ZNN left then too. The Nats have needed pitchers. There's been space since. How many guys have had at least one full year in the past 3 seasons? How many of those have been Nats?
Cut down to 22 starts (to account for rest of 2018) I'm going to get a handful more guys in here. And let's make it through 4th season since we're looking for guys the Nats have developed for this new time of need. There have been 88 pitchers with at least one full year here. We would expect 3 Nats. Ray's in here - but just barely (get's his 3rd and 4th seasons in 16-17) that's not what we're looking for. With one year we see both Reynaldo Lopez and Lucas Giolito**. They were both Nats developed. Both debuted in 2016. And... that's it. So a little under expectation but not much.
So this quick stroll through the pitchers in the league would seem to suggest the Nats are not bad at developing starting pitchers. Average over the course of the time frame we are looking at. Maybe a little skewed toward the past but still mostly able to develop full-time major league talent for 2018. Given that the latest three who have become full-time starters (Ray, Lopez, and Giolito) were all dealt I'd say the problem recently is less development and more identifications of the ones to keep and the ones to let go. Maybe a problem identifying who are the real injury risks and who are minor ones.
Of course there's a lot of hemming and hawing up there so have at the methods of this.
*And what's a "full season" I mean literally it would be 32/33 starts but I set the limit at 25. See! There's a lot of lines that have to be drawn for this analysis. And what if they aren't GOOD seasons? You should get more credit for the good, right? And what's development and what's just drafting? Lots of questions!
**How are they doing? Lopez has had an EXCELLENT September. 1 ER in 3 starts, 22K and 4 BB. Best he's pitched all year, balancing out his terrible July to give his year proper representation in the final stats. Which is to say he's been perfectly fine as a blah 3 or good 4. Giolito's gone the other way, with a terrible September so far. Knocked out early by Detroit and knocked around by Baltimore. Walks, which plagued him, aren't too bad but strikeouts almost gone with it. His numbers now 5.77 capture his year, too which is a roller coaster with a few mild highs and a lot of real low lows. He's a guy that starts as a 5th starter in 2019. For both guys 2019 is going to be where their careers are set likely.
Wednesday, September 19, 2018
So what's gone right?
Not everything is bad. The Nats aren't going to make the playoffs, but they have played as well as the other teams in the NL East since the break meaning that the talent to challenge for the East is still there (whatever you think of that bar). Of course it's one thing if this was spurred on by guys either out the door or soon to be, it's another if it was spurred on by talent staying in DC. What have the Nats numbers looked like since the break?
Offense
Crushing it
Bryce : .304 / .444 / .560
Zimmerman : .299 / .377 / .565
Soto : .296 / .414 / .522
Rendon : .335 / .394 / .510
Murphy : .340 / .370 / .904
A mixed bag. Murphy is gone and unlikely to come back. Bryce could be gone. Zimm is a strong bet not to reach 120 games. But Soto could get better and Rendon will likely be here unless they rebuild. So that's a very solid two-batters to build around
Surviving
Eaton : .274 / .377 / .400
Turner : .270 / .329 / .405
Difo : .218 / .302 / .427
Yes Difo has well outslugged Eaton and Turner. That's not a good sign, especially for Turner who doesn't have the "I've been injured for two years! Give me some time!" excuse Eaton does. Difo doubters (like me!) will note that it has been just 127 PAs which isn't enough to shake out the flukes and historically he's more a .370 slugger. None of this is good, but it's workable for the other guys in the line-up if your first bunch is strong enough.
Struggling
Kieboom : .204 / .317 / .370
Weiters : .246 / .327 / .358
all the other OFs (Sanchez, Robles so far, Stevenson, MAT)
Severino barely played in the 2nd half before getting injured but he was worse than these two. Wieters will be gone but that's it that has to go. Robles is likely to start if Bryce leaves and his production range going into next year will vary wildly from ROY candidate to AAAA guy.
The offense has a decent start with Soto and Rendon, but around them there isn't quite enough. Zimm can hit when healthy but that's like half the time. Eaton should get better with health, but that's no guarantee either. The rest of the "here next year" crew isn't special. Of course we don't expect the Nats to stand pat here. But the early look says - if Bryce is gone, a lot is going to ride on Robles. Is he a third core bat or just decent line-up filler?
Pitching
Nasty stuff
Holland : WHIP 0.873, 11.3 K/9, 2.88 K/BB
Scherzer : 0.944, 11.9, 6.33
Doolittle : 1.000, 9.0, 10.00 (in 5IP)
Madson : 1.000, 9.0, 6.00 (10 IP)
Kintzler : 1.000, 7.2, 4.00 (5 IP)
Hey. There was a reason the Nats had built around those three in the bullpen. No, the results didn't always match what these numbers suggest. Madson was real prone to the long ball. Kintzler has had consistency issues. But these guys had talent and are going to have to be replaced. Could Holland be one? Perhaps... if he sticks around.
And of course Max is Max.
Mixed Bag
Man there's a lot of pitchers... ok Fedde, Roark, Miller, Hellickson, Ross, Collins, Grace, Suero, Jefry, and Stras all fit in here. Ross barely pitched. Fedde, Stras, and Collins have good stuff but had control issues. Miller, Hellickson, and Grace had decent control but no stuff. Jefry is smoke and mirrors to be even passable. That leaves Roark who has compensated for a complete lack of stuff (only a 6.6 K/9 in 2nd half) with complete control. 7 walks in 65+ innings.
What does that all say. It says the Nats have plenty of "other guys" to fill out the pen but no one you really love. It also says that the rotation may be an issue. Roark has been ok, but is pitching in a way that he hasn't historically which is something that makes you question how sustainable it is. Strasburg actually looks better when you take a look at his game log - the trends are what you want to see in terms of him getting back to his old self, but again he doesn't pitch a full season. Add in that Fedde is a question mark and Jefry is a mirage and you have to figure another rotation arm is needed.
Get him out of here stuff
Milone, Glover, Gio, Kelley, Herrera, Solis, Williams, Cordero, Gott. Gio was pretty terrible in the second half but he's gone now. Milone is incredibly hittable, especially over the fence type of hits. Glover, Kelley (gone), Herrera, Williams and Cordero all showed little stuff and Glover, Williams and Cordero were all wild. Gott barely pitched but was bad. He and Williams, Solis were all homer prone as well.
Starter wise there isn't anything here to worry about. Gio and Milone weren't in the plans for 2019. We already noted they need a new starter and it's good to see that Fedde and Jefry, at least one of who will likely fill in a rotation spot, aren't in this group (though Jefry is skirting it). Bullpen wise though you see a lot of names here of guys they hoped to be big parts of the Nats pen moving forward. Solis, Glover, and Gott were probably three guys they expect to run out there in big spot by now. Instead they are being run out of town. Williams was the next guy they said to get excited about and he's been just as bad. There's a lot of small IP in here but also a lot to worry about.
The pitching has been a trouble spot in the 2nd half in compared to the offense and there isn't much to make you optimistic as the season ends. I guess you can feel ok about the rotation. Max is Max, Stras is rounding back into form, Roark should be rotation worthy if not actually good and Fedde isn't terrible. If the Nats get a legit contender #2 type then it'll be a pretty good rotation especially the top end. But the pen is a different story. There's seemingly no one between Doolittle and the space filler part of the bullpen and the guys you were looking toward to play important rolls haven't stepped up, they've fallen down.
The second half Nats have shown an ability to compete. To keep that up in 2019 it looks like a couple decent signings might keep the offense up because what's here is pretty good. A good signing might keep the rotation up because what's here is workable. But the bullpen is in shambles, again, and nothing here is showing they are worth relying in 2019 on outside of Doolittle.
Offense
Crushing it
Bryce : .304 / .444 / .560
Zimmerman : .299 / .377 / .565
Soto : .296 / .414 / .522
Rendon : .335 / .394 / .510
Murphy : .340 / .370 / .904
A mixed bag. Murphy is gone and unlikely to come back. Bryce could be gone. Zimm is a strong bet not to reach 120 games. But Soto could get better and Rendon will likely be here unless they rebuild. So that's a very solid two-batters to build around
Surviving
Eaton : .274 / .377 / .400
Turner : .270 / .329 / .405
Difo : .218 / .302 / .427
Yes Difo has well outslugged Eaton and Turner. That's not a good sign, especially for Turner who doesn't have the "I've been injured for two years! Give me some time!" excuse Eaton does. Difo doubters (like me!) will note that it has been just 127 PAs which isn't enough to shake out the flukes and historically he's more a .370 slugger. None of this is good, but it's workable for the other guys in the line-up if your first bunch is strong enough.
Struggling
Kieboom : .204 / .317 / .370
Weiters : .246 / .327 / .358
all the other OFs (Sanchez, Robles so far, Stevenson, MAT)
Severino barely played in the 2nd half before getting injured but he was worse than these two. Wieters will be gone but that's it that has to go. Robles is likely to start if Bryce leaves and his production range going into next year will vary wildly from ROY candidate to AAAA guy.
The offense has a decent start with Soto and Rendon, but around them there isn't quite enough. Zimm can hit when healthy but that's like half the time. Eaton should get better with health, but that's no guarantee either. The rest of the "here next year" crew isn't special. Of course we don't expect the Nats to stand pat here. But the early look says - if Bryce is gone, a lot is going to ride on Robles. Is he a third core bat or just decent line-up filler?
Pitching
Nasty stuff
Holland : WHIP 0.873, 11.3 K/9, 2.88 K/BB
Scherzer : 0.944, 11.9, 6.33
Doolittle : 1.000, 9.0, 10.00 (in 5IP)
Madson : 1.000, 9.0, 6.00 (10 IP)
Kintzler : 1.000, 7.2, 4.00 (5 IP)
Hey. There was a reason the Nats had built around those three in the bullpen. No, the results didn't always match what these numbers suggest. Madson was real prone to the long ball. Kintzler has had consistency issues. But these guys had talent and are going to have to be replaced. Could Holland be one? Perhaps... if he sticks around.
And of course Max is Max.
Mixed Bag
Man there's a lot of pitchers... ok Fedde, Roark, Miller, Hellickson, Ross, Collins, Grace, Suero, Jefry, and Stras all fit in here. Ross barely pitched. Fedde, Stras, and Collins have good stuff but had control issues. Miller, Hellickson, and Grace had decent control but no stuff. Jefry is smoke and mirrors to be even passable. That leaves Roark who has compensated for a complete lack of stuff (only a 6.6 K/9 in 2nd half) with complete control. 7 walks in 65+ innings.
What does that all say. It says the Nats have plenty of "other guys" to fill out the pen but no one you really love. It also says that the rotation may be an issue. Roark has been ok, but is pitching in a way that he hasn't historically which is something that makes you question how sustainable it is. Strasburg actually looks better when you take a look at his game log - the trends are what you want to see in terms of him getting back to his old self, but again he doesn't pitch a full season. Add in that Fedde is a question mark and Jefry is a mirage and you have to figure another rotation arm is needed.
Get him out of here stuff
Milone, Glover, Gio, Kelley, Herrera, Solis, Williams, Cordero, Gott. Gio was pretty terrible in the second half but he's gone now. Milone is incredibly hittable, especially over the fence type of hits. Glover, Kelley (gone), Herrera, Williams and Cordero all showed little stuff and Glover, Williams and Cordero were all wild. Gott barely pitched but was bad. He and Williams, Solis were all homer prone as well.
Starter wise there isn't anything here to worry about. Gio and Milone weren't in the plans for 2019. We already noted they need a new starter and it's good to see that Fedde and Jefry, at least one of who will likely fill in a rotation spot, aren't in this group (though Jefry is skirting it). Bullpen wise though you see a lot of names here of guys they hoped to be big parts of the Nats pen moving forward. Solis, Glover, and Gott were probably three guys they expect to run out there in big spot by now. Instead they are being run out of town. Williams was the next guy they said to get excited about and he's been just as bad. There's a lot of small IP in here but also a lot to worry about.
The pitching has been a trouble spot in the 2nd half in compared to the offense and there isn't much to make you optimistic as the season ends. I guess you can feel ok about the rotation. Max is Max, Stras is rounding back into form, Roark should be rotation worthy if not actually good and Fedde isn't terrible. If the Nats get a legit contender #2 type then it'll be a pretty good rotation especially the top end. But the pen is a different story. There's seemingly no one between Doolittle and the space filler part of the bullpen and the guys you were looking toward to play important rolls haven't stepped up, they've fallen down.
The second half Nats have shown an ability to compete. To keep that up in 2019 it looks like a couple decent signings might keep the offense up because what's here is pretty good. A good signing might keep the rotation up because what's here is workable. But the bullpen is in shambles, again, and nothing here is showing they are worth relying in 2019 on outside of Doolittle.
Monday, September 17, 2018
Monday Quickie - promise kept by me
Max.
It was Max that couldn't keep the promise for you dreamers. The Nats would win the second and third game but with the loss of the first the situation shifted. It could have been a 'tragic number' of 8 with 12 left. Now it's 6*. Sorry. Blame him. Nats go 9-3 and Braves 3-9? Not good enough. Call me when the gap gets to three (iow 2019)
Speaking of Max here's the Cy Young battle as it stands
Max : 17-7 2.53 0.915 WHIP, 12.1K/9, 2.1BB/9, 0.9 HR/9
deGrom : 8-9 1.78 0.950 WHIP, 11.2K/9, 2.0BB/9, 0.4 HR/9
(I could give you Nola's stats but I don't see the point. Maybe if the Phillies were taking the East but they are most certainly not)
I don't see how Max is winning this but I've been wrong before.
In good news though Soto took the weekend over Acuna, dominating the last two games after Acuna won the first.
Soto : .305 / .421 / .532, 20 HR, 72 R, 64 RBI, 5 SB
Acuna : .292 / .368 / .574, 25 HR, 71 R, 55 RBI, 14 SB
This is back to being anyone's award.
*If you are curious it's 7 for the WC but it's 7 looking at three different teams.
It was Max that couldn't keep the promise for you dreamers. The Nats would win the second and third game but with the loss of the first the situation shifted. It could have been a 'tragic number' of 8 with 12 left. Now it's 6*. Sorry. Blame him. Nats go 9-3 and Braves 3-9? Not good enough. Call me when the gap gets to three (iow 2019)
Speaking of Max here's the Cy Young battle as it stands
Max : 17-7 2.53 0.915 WHIP, 12.1K/9, 2.1BB/9, 0.9 HR/9
deGrom : 8-9 1.78 0.950 WHIP, 11.2K/9, 2.0BB/9, 0.4 HR/9
(I could give you Nola's stats but I don't see the point. Maybe if the Phillies were taking the East but they are most certainly not)
I don't see how Max is winning this but I've been wrong before.
In good news though Soto took the weekend over Acuna, dominating the last two games after Acuna won the first.
Soto : .305 / .421 / .532, 20 HR, 72 R, 64 RBI, 5 SB
Acuna : .292 / .368 / .574, 25 HR, 71 R, 55 RBI, 14 SB
This is back to being anyone's award.
*If you are curious it's 7 for the WC but it's 7 looking at three different teams.
Thursday, September 13, 2018
My promise to you dreamers
I have promised that if the Nationals sweep the Braves I will post a very detailed post on their chances for the playoffs. This is movement from yesterday where I said they had to be 5 out. I'm giving them today. Look at me, all generous and stuff.
While I'd love for the Nats to take full credit for killing the Phillies chances - the Phillies have been playing particularly bad baseball for a long while now. Before this sweep they lost series @NYM, @MIA, vCHC, vNATS, @TOR, @NATS, vNYM...
SPLIT VERSUS BOSTON!
@SDP and finally @ARI.
That's a month of losing series. Remember when I said to catch a team the Nats would have to play like the best or they like the worst? Well the Phillies played like the worst and the Nats caught them.
The other thing that happened last night (well other than Soto bombing another HR, but that doesn't change the Soto v Acuna series coming up, just makes it better) is that the Nats took it to Aaron Nola. It wasn't a bad outing but it was decidedly mediocre, and in this Cy Young race, that's not going to cut it. You can officially cut Nola out of the voting. Thanks to all who made me put him in and waste all that precious time! Days of 24hr research by my staff, for naught!
Today is the infamous Cubs make-up game which the cubs fans are treating like the MLB is sending them in a plane into the eye of Florence so they'll die so the Brewers can win. Win this game and shut them up.
While I'd love for the Nats to take full credit for killing the Phillies chances - the Phillies have been playing particularly bad baseball for a long while now. Before this sweep they lost series @NYM, @MIA, vCHC, vNATS, @TOR, @NATS, vNYM...
SPLIT VERSUS BOSTON!
@SDP and finally @ARI.
That's a month of losing series. Remember when I said to catch a team the Nats would have to play like the best or they like the worst? Well the Phillies played like the worst and the Nats caught them.
The other thing that happened last night (well other than Soto bombing another HR, but that doesn't change the Soto v Acuna series coming up, just makes it better) is that the Nats took it to Aaron Nola. It wasn't a bad outing but it was decidedly mediocre, and in this Cy Young race, that's not going to cut it. You can officially cut Nola out of the voting. Thanks to all who made me put him in and waste all that precious time! Days of 24hr research by my staff, for naught!
Today is the infamous Cubs make-up game which the cubs fans are treating like the MLB is sending them in a plane into the eye of Florence so they'll die so the Brewers can win. Win this game and shut them up.
Wednesday, September 12, 2018
Not too little, but too late.
Four in a row! As noted the Nats haven't done that since the very end of May. Should it be enjoyed? Yes! If you are still following the team live it up. Good baseball is better than bad baseball is better than no baseball and soon you'll have no baseball. Should it be celebrated? Naaaaaaaaaaaah.
Now of course a run like this starts the mind going on about furious finishes. But that's where the too late comes in. Even if the whole league was cooperating the Nats would still be 4 out of first and with 17 games to go that's a pretty big hurdle. 12-5 vs 7-10 or something. A run that could be derailed by a simple Atlanta win in the series against the Nats (which may be played somewhere other than Atlanta - which would get all the stories going) or Colorado win at the end of the year.
Notice I said "even if the whole league is cooperating" because it isn't. The Braves have also won four in a row turning that 12-5 vs 7-10 dream into a 15-2 vs 6-11 nigh impossibilty* The Wild Card keeps churning and while the Nats have made major gains against the Phillies, Dbacks, and Dodgers, the Cardinals have basically held ground (now 8 ahead) and all it was going to take was one of those teams holding position to make the WC2 a non-issue.
Why am I still talking about the season? Because why not? It's still going on so I'm still talking about it until it has it's last breath. I'm not saying there's a chance again.**
What I will mention is Juan Soto homering his way back into the ROY race. This squeaks his OPS back over Acuna's (who tripled and walked twice last night) Soto is still a half-step behind because of all the other mitigating factors (Acuna better in field, on basepaths - that we've been allowed to see, team is going to beat Soto's team). Barring someone going 0-8 or 8-8 this will dovetail nicely into the Braves/Nats series. FOR ROY SUPREMECY!
*I never say never because it's never never until it's technically never.
**When would I? I suppose if they are able to hold at 8 and then sweep the Braves? Basically go into next Monday 5 back or closer. That's not a good spot but the MIA/NYM/MIA games would set up for a run that could get you thinking.
Now of course a run like this starts the mind going on about furious finishes. But that's where the too late comes in. Even if the whole league was cooperating the Nats would still be 4 out of first and with 17 games to go that's a pretty big hurdle. 12-5 vs 7-10 or something. A run that could be derailed by a simple Atlanta win in the series against the Nats (which may be played somewhere other than Atlanta - which would get all the stories going) or Colorado win at the end of the year.
Notice I said "even if the whole league is cooperating" because it isn't. The Braves have also won four in a row turning that 12-5 vs 7-10 dream into a 15-2 vs 6-11 nigh impossibilty* The Wild Card keeps churning and while the Nats have made major gains against the Phillies, Dbacks, and Dodgers, the Cardinals have basically held ground (now 8 ahead) and all it was going to take was one of those teams holding position to make the WC2 a non-issue.
Why am I still talking about the season? Because why not? It's still going on so I'm still talking about it until it has it's last breath. I'm not saying there's a chance again.**
What I will mention is Juan Soto homering his way back into the ROY race. This squeaks his OPS back over Acuna's (who tripled and walked twice last night) Soto is still a half-step behind because of all the other mitigating factors (Acuna better in field, on basepaths - that we've been allowed to see, team is going to beat Soto's team). Barring someone going 0-8 or 8-8 this will dovetail nicely into the Braves/Nats series. FOR ROY SUPREMECY!
*I never say never because it's never never until it's technically never.
**When would I? I suppose if they are able to hold at 8 and then sweep the Braves? Basically go into next Monday 5 back or closer. That's not a good spot but the MIA/NYM/MIA games would set up for a run that could get you thinking.
Monday, September 10, 2018
Monday Quickie
3 Week Status
Record: 71-72
Ground gained/lost in division last wk : +1 games to PHI, +0.5 games to ATL
Ground gained/lost in WC race last wk : 0 to STL, -2 MIL, 0 LAD, -2.5 PIT, -1 COL, +1 ARI
HOW BAD IS THIS LEAGUE? The Nats actually gained ground last week and didn't play well. It's maddening really. But this is the last update. The Nats haven't gained any significant ground in the division since dropping to 7 games out during the "injury guys can't play" into "one-run loss massacre" time frame of late June early July. They haven't been factors in the WC race for 3+ weeks now. At this point they are out of time. The magic number for the Braves over the Nats is a bad day away from single digits. The Wild Card is a near impossibility. This is the dead man walking.
CY RACE
Scherzer : 17-6 2.31 ERA, 0.883 WHIP, 12.0 K/9, 2.0 BB/9, 0.9 HR/9 (2.66 FIP)
deGrom 8-8 1.68 ERA, 0.963 WHIP, 11.0 K/9, 2.0 BB/9, 0.4 HR/9 (2.07 FIP)
Nola : 16-4 2.29 ERA, 0.959 WHIP, 9.3 K/9, 2.4 BB/9, 0.6 HR/9 (2.87 FIP)
deGrom pitches tonight and didn't pitch last week. Scherzer had an impressive game vs the Cubs but everything but HR/9 nudge in the wrong direction. Oh and wins. Got a win. So did Nola but against the Mets it doesn't register like that Cubs game did. Still anyone's game but I have to think Nola is losing any chance to make up ground. Not that he hasn't pitched well but if Max isn't going to falter then Nola needs to be spectacular.
ROY RACE
Soto : .298 / .416 / .506 16 HR, 2 SB, 56 RBI
Acuna : .293 / .367 / .581 25 HR, 14 SB, 53 RBI
I hate to say it but Acuna might be separating here. He's drawn 8 walks in the past week to really push up the OBP. Along with that he's hit 2 more homers (5 XBH) and stole three more bases. Everyday Juan has been limited in his ABs thanks to the rain but hasn't been able to rachet up the power in a long time. He's nearing 50% of his time now running a line like .275 / .400 / .400 which on one hand is an incredible amount of patience, but on the other isn't going to win a lot of ROY votes over a guy slugging near .600.
Boz wrote an article this weekend saying "Keep Davey". It's a fair take, in my opinion. Davey was the wrong guy to take over a team and task with winning it all. Inexperience does not jive with a plan that wants to squeak out wins where they couldn't before. But a one-year experienced manager motivating a young team to try to make the playoffs? Or riding out a couple resetting years and then getting a judgment at the end of year 3? Those aren't indefensible. Do I fire Davey Martinez? Well yes. But they I have no compunction in re-hiring Dusty or throwing money at Girardi. Also I hate the camel schtick. But I'm not going to go crazy if he's here on Opening Day 2019.
Record: 71-72
Ground gained/lost in division last wk : +1 games to PHI, +0.5 games to ATL
Ground gained/lost in WC race last wk : 0 to STL, -2 MIL, 0 LAD, -2.5 PIT, -1 COL, +1 ARI
HOW BAD IS THIS LEAGUE? The Nats actually gained ground last week and didn't play well. It's maddening really. But this is the last update. The Nats haven't gained any significant ground in the division since dropping to 7 games out during the "injury guys can't play" into "one-run loss massacre" time frame of late June early July. They haven't been factors in the WC race for 3+ weeks now. At this point they are out of time. The magic number for the Braves over the Nats is a bad day away from single digits. The Wild Card is a near impossibility. This is the dead man walking.
CY RACE
Scherzer : 17-6 2.31 ERA, 0.883 WHIP, 12.0 K/9, 2.0 BB/9, 0.9 HR/9 (2.66 FIP)
deGrom 8-8 1.68 ERA, 0.963 WHIP, 11.0 K/9, 2.0 BB/9, 0.4 HR/9 (2.07 FIP)
Nola : 16-4 2.29 ERA, 0.959 WHIP, 9.3 K/9, 2.4 BB/9, 0.6 HR/9 (2.87 FIP)
deGrom pitches tonight and didn't pitch last week. Scherzer had an impressive game vs the Cubs but everything but HR/9 nudge in the wrong direction. Oh and wins. Got a win. So did Nola but against the Mets it doesn't register like that Cubs game did. Still anyone's game but I have to think Nola is losing any chance to make up ground. Not that he hasn't pitched well but if Max isn't going to falter then Nola needs to be spectacular.
ROY RACE
Soto : .298 / .416 / .506 16 HR, 2 SB, 56 RBI
Acuna : .293 / .367 / .581 25 HR, 14 SB, 53 RBI
I hate to say it but Acuna might be separating here. He's drawn 8 walks in the past week to really push up the OBP. Along with that he's hit 2 more homers (5 XBH) and stole three more bases. Everyday Juan has been limited in his ABs thanks to the rain but hasn't been able to rachet up the power in a long time. He's nearing 50% of his time now running a line like .275 / .400 / .400 which on one hand is an incredible amount of patience, but on the other isn't going to win a lot of ROY votes over a guy slugging near .600.
Boz wrote an article this weekend saying "Keep Davey". It's a fair take, in my opinion. Davey was the wrong guy to take over a team and task with winning it all. Inexperience does not jive with a plan that wants to squeak out wins where they couldn't before. But a one-year experienced manager motivating a young team to try to make the playoffs? Or riding out a couple resetting years and then getting a judgment at the end of year 3? Those aren't indefensible. Do I fire Davey Martinez? Well yes. But they I have no compunction in re-hiring Dusty or throwing money at Girardi. Also I hate the camel schtick. But I'm not going to go crazy if he's here on Opening Day 2019.
Friday, September 07, 2018
Aaaaand we're done here
We'll do one more update on Monday perhaps but even the dreamers have to stop dreaming now. With three straight losses and a 2-6 record in their last 8 games the Nats have finally managed to "out bad" the rest of the NL which had been either stumbling along (NL East) or trading hot and cold streaks (WC teams). They are now 8.5 games out of first, 9.5 out of the second wild card and officially in "double miracle" time.
Still want to dream just for fun? Sorry.
The Wild Card is probably just a week a way from a legitimate mathematical impossibility. With so many teams ahead of them there are too many match-ups that give wins to someone fighting for the 2nd Wild Card. ARI plays LAD, STL plays LAD, STL plays PIT, COL plays PHI, etc.. Losses for one team are wins for another, which means the Nats not gaining ground on someone ahead of them. Technically if you like I can piece together a way it would work but it's nothing that should be considered even in fun. It's a "what if the Nats ride unicorns around the bases?" scenario. It's not going to happen.
The NL East will hold out longer because there are only two teams ahead of the Nats and the Phillies have been among the worst teams in baseball over the past 3 weeks (5-12). Unfortunately the Phillies and Braves do play each other 7 times over the last 11 games so the magic number will slam up on the Nats pretty fast. How bad is it though? Well if the Braves go .500 (11-11) to finish a measly 88-75, the Nats would have to go 20-2 to beat them out. That's why it's double miracle time. The Nats need to go on an incredible run say... 17-5 AND the Braves need to suddenly be terrible, say... 8-14 (and that has to happen in a way where they aren't giving too many wins to the Phillies if the Phillies aren't just losing 2 out of every 3 games still). Have double miracles happened in the history of baseball? Ok, yes. I'll admit they have. But when you have like 400 races over the history of baseball you are going to find an example of everything. One or two times it did happen mean it didn't happen 398 or 399 times.
The Nats are now spoilers. Who could they spoil? Lots of teams. They could hurt Chicago, who has a nice but not insurmountable lead over the Brewers, if they can win the rest of these games. (and who doesn't want to see the Brewers instead of the Cubs?). They could knock the Phillies out of contention with a sweep of the three games following that. If you prefer the Phillies over ATL they could get swept by the Phillies then sweep the Braves. They end with a series in Colorado where they could swing the NL West. A lot of opportunity to play an important role.
But Harper what if I just want to watch good, no-spoiler version, playoff relevant baseball? Well there are other teams to watch and baseball will be gone sooner than you think so I suggest tuning into those games. I'll be offering up suggestions for each series time frame. For this weekend, your best bet is the Dodgers at the Rockies. The Rockies hold a 1.5 game lead over the Dodgers in an NL West 3-way race that has stayed tight for a while. The other team in that trio, the Dbacks, are hosting the Braves. Arizona needs those wins but Atlanta has no interest in letting Philly back into the race. Plus you can keep an eye on Acuna in the ROY race. If you want good baseball or just earlier games the Red Sox and Astros are playing in a possible playoff preview. And if you are a late game person, the Yankees are in Seattle, with the Mariners clinging to playoff hopes while the clubhouse brawls eachother. And who doesn't like to see the team 9 out of 10 SABR guys seem to like fail? As a last choice you can watch Max's Cy Young rivals go at it in the Phillies Mets series; Nola tonight, deGrom on Sunday. (and Max on Saturday)
So watch some baseball - even if it's not Nats.
Still want to dream just for fun? Sorry.
The Wild Card is probably just a week a way from a legitimate mathematical impossibility. With so many teams ahead of them there are too many match-ups that give wins to someone fighting for the 2nd Wild Card. ARI plays LAD, STL plays LAD, STL plays PIT, COL plays PHI, etc.. Losses for one team are wins for another, which means the Nats not gaining ground on someone ahead of them. Technically if you like I can piece together a way it would work but it's nothing that should be considered even in fun. It's a "what if the Nats ride unicorns around the bases?" scenario. It's not going to happen.
The NL East will hold out longer because there are only two teams ahead of the Nats and the Phillies have been among the worst teams in baseball over the past 3 weeks (5-12). Unfortunately the Phillies and Braves do play each other 7 times over the last 11 games so the magic number will slam up on the Nats pretty fast. How bad is it though? Well if the Braves go .500 (11-11) to finish a measly 88-75, the Nats would have to go 20-2 to beat them out. That's why it's double miracle time. The Nats need to go on an incredible run say... 17-5 AND the Braves need to suddenly be terrible, say... 8-14 (and that has to happen in a way where they aren't giving too many wins to the Phillies if the Phillies aren't just losing 2 out of every 3 games still). Have double miracles happened in the history of baseball? Ok, yes. I'll admit they have. But when you have like 400 races over the history of baseball you are going to find an example of everything. One or two times it did happen mean it didn't happen 398 or 399 times.
The Nats are now spoilers. Who could they spoil? Lots of teams. They could hurt Chicago, who has a nice but not insurmountable lead over the Brewers, if they can win the rest of these games. (and who doesn't want to see the Brewers instead of the Cubs?). They could knock the Phillies out of contention with a sweep of the three games following that. If you prefer the Phillies over ATL they could get swept by the Phillies then sweep the Braves. They end with a series in Colorado where they could swing the NL West. A lot of opportunity to play an important role.
But Harper what if I just want to watch good, no-spoiler version, playoff relevant baseball? Well there are other teams to watch and baseball will be gone sooner than you think so I suggest tuning into those games. I'll be offering up suggestions for each series time frame. For this weekend, your best bet is the Dodgers at the Rockies. The Rockies hold a 1.5 game lead over the Dodgers in an NL West 3-way race that has stayed tight for a while. The other team in that trio, the Dbacks, are hosting the Braves. Arizona needs those wins but Atlanta has no interest in letting Philly back into the race. Plus you can keep an eye on Acuna in the ROY race. If you want good baseball or just earlier games the Red Sox and Astros are playing in a possible playoff preview. And if you are a late game person, the Yankees are in Seattle, with the Mariners clinging to playoff hopes while the clubhouse brawls eachother. And who doesn't like to see the team 9 out of 10 SABR guys seem to like fail? As a last choice you can watch Max's Cy Young rivals go at it in the Phillies Mets series; Nola tonight, deGrom on Sunday. (and Max on Saturday)
So watch some baseball - even if it's not Nats.
Thursday, September 06, 2018
The 2018 Nats deserve this
Underlying the whole Nationals season is an unsettling fact for Nats fans. Beyond the injuries and past the bad luck/variability, lies the simple truth that the Nationals have not played like a playoff team this year. This is not a division winner undone by circumstance, but a team that would struggle to make it in, now struggling to make .500 because of things not going their way. The only reason it doesn't look worse is because arguably the Braves and Phillies are both the type that would struggle to make it in as well.
The pythagorean record suggests this. A 77-63 record run is good, not great, on pace for an 89 win season that would miss the playoffs as often as make it over the window period. A quick jaunt through the schedule confirms this (and forgive me if this retreads ground)
Mar 30 - Apr 29: 12-16 (14.3-13.7 pythag, which projects to 83 wins to help you understand)
The Nats would start fast but would then slow down as injuries piled up. Eaton and Rendon would both go down during this time, and Zimmerman would struggle mightily as it was clear something was wrong with him. With the Mets playing well, the schedule was on the harder side and honestly, but understandably, the team didn't play well during this time. Add in a little bad luck and it was a bad start.
Apr 30 - Jun 8 24-10 (23.4-10.6, 111 wins)
That would all change in May as they shed the bad luck and started to get better. Notice I didn't say healthy, because outside of Rendon coming back that didn't happen. But they got better players in the line-up. A struggling Zim would finally sit allowing Adams and Reynolds to play more. Soto would come up when Kendrick went down. Kendrick was good but he's no Soto.The schedule softened and the Nats took advantage of it and played like they should - dominating the bad teams*
At this point the season had gone to form. They had injury troubles and that cost them a little, but all in all a talented team, a playoff team, was playing up to its potential now. The bad luck hadn't been replaced by good luck but it had been mitigated by a long stretch where things were pretty even. They were back in first place. All that was left at this point was to incorporate the injured players as they came back and cruise to victory. Instead the Nats suffered a reeling 1-2 combo.
Jun 9 - Jun 26 5-11 (4.8-11.2, 49 wins)
Now here's part 1 where the season changed. It was understood the Nats would need to reincorporate Eaton, who'd been out most of the year, and Murphy, who'd been out all year. They figured they'd bring them in and probably get even better. However, injury returns can be tricky. It wasn't out of the question that they might suffer a little. But they didn't suffer a little - they suffered a lot. These guys struggled, Bryce struggled, and Roark and Gio went off the rails. What should have been a period where the Nats went around .500 and held ground instead became a time where they crashed and burned. Thanks to some hot play from NL East rivals, they found themselves 4 games out.
They played extremely poorly and had no one to blame but themselves for the bad position they were in. It wasn't bad luck at this point. Nearly half way into a season being under 2 games off by pythag is nothing. It wasn't injury. They were healthy now. It was the Nats. They deserved to be where they were, set up for a fall.
Jun 28 - Jul 4 1-6 (3.1-3.9, 72 wins)
And here's part 2. The Nats would suffer 4 one-run losses in 5 games. This run of bad luck would put the team behind the 8 ball for the remainder of the season. But please note - they didn't particularly play well here. Even looking at RS/RA, they weren't playing .500 ball against the good teams.
Jul 5 - Jul 15 6-5 (6.3-4.7, 93 wins)
So now the Nats were forced now to play catch-up. The good part is that they had a couple of easy stretches to get back in the race both before and after the ASB. If they could play like they did during May the Nats would make up the ground they needed. Maybe not all of it, but a large chunk, setting the team up for a fight in August and September. However, the Nats before the All-Star break were not impressive. They didn't dominate, but instead were merely ok against a soft bunch of teams which isn't good enough to make a real playoff run. There was the loss of Doolittle at this time but a team in the dog days is going to have to work around injuries.
To summarize: The Nats up until the injured guys came back were in contention and not terribly unlucky. Injuries cost them a few games but things were fine. Then the Nats would play a month-plus of baseball that was not playoff worthy. They would play terrible for half that time. They would play poorly and catch some bad luck. They would play middling and not make up ground. The Nats were in position. The Nats failed. Even with even luck, the now healthy Nats should have only went something like 14/15-19/20. Strip away the excuses and for this month, there's a mediocre team underneath.
Jul 20 - Aug 5 9-6 (10.7-4.3, 115 wins)
After the ASB was better. Rizzo went a little nuts, trading away Kintzler and Kelley trying to force team unity. That is a risky move but the schedule was soft and if you were going to try something like this now was the time. And to be fair the Nats did respond and played this stretch like they should. For a brief two and a half week period the Nats were a playoff deserving squad again. On the down side they lost Strasburg and a good starting pitcher is a hard thing to cover for without a deal. They chose not to trade for anything. They didn't make up much ground in the division, but made some gains in the Wild Card race and set up a possible exciting finish, though at this point it was feeling like the normal playoff pace wouldn't do it and more would be needed.
Aug 7 - Aug 19 5-9 (6.3-7.7, 73 wins)
Turns out it didn't matter because the Nats couldn't even hit the normal playoff pace. Again the team wilted in the face of good competition and their season was relegated to "miracle please". Once again a goal wasn't reached.
So now over the past 2+ months of baseball (Early June to Mid August) the Nats primarily played like a non-playoff team. Did they suffer bad luck? Sure. Did injuries cost them that first month? Definitely. But the main reason the Nats weren't contending was the Nats, when healthy and not seeing the ball bounce the wrong way, were not playing well.
Aug 21 - Sep 4 7-7 (7.6-6.4, 87 wins)
For completeness (doesn't count yesterday bc I did this last night). At this point, a reeling Phillies team would help the Nats stay .500 but they'd lose series to the Marlins and Mets, meaning not good against the bad. Then top it off with losses to the Brewers and Cards - not good against the good. The Nats were a different team now. Murphy had been dealt. Adams had been dealt. Gio and Madson would go at the trade deadline. It's hard to say this team could do any better than they have. But they certainly haven't overperformed.
The Nats were dealt a raw hand with the luck and the injuries but they also played worse than expected for a good chunk of the season. Where you want to lay the blame for that is up to you but you can't just blame outside forces. The problems were internal this season and it's that base that allowed everything else to turn this team into one fighting for .500.
*remember in general you go for around .500 against the good team, around 100+ win pace for the bad teams. Assuming relatively even distribution of these games you finish in the low 90s.
The pythagorean record suggests this. A 77-63 record run is good, not great, on pace for an 89 win season that would miss the playoffs as often as make it over the window period. A quick jaunt through the schedule confirms this (and forgive me if this retreads ground)
Mar 30 - Apr 29: 12-16 (14.3-13.7 pythag, which projects to 83 wins to help you understand)
The Nats would start fast but would then slow down as injuries piled up. Eaton and Rendon would both go down during this time, and Zimmerman would struggle mightily as it was clear something was wrong with him. With the Mets playing well, the schedule was on the harder side and honestly, but understandably, the team didn't play well during this time. Add in a little bad luck and it was a bad start.
Apr 30 - Jun 8 24-10 (23.4-10.6, 111 wins)
That would all change in May as they shed the bad luck and started to get better. Notice I didn't say healthy, because outside of Rendon coming back that didn't happen. But they got better players in the line-up. A struggling Zim would finally sit allowing Adams and Reynolds to play more. Soto would come up when Kendrick went down. Kendrick was good but he's no Soto.The schedule softened and the Nats took advantage of it and played like they should - dominating the bad teams*
At this point the season had gone to form. They had injury troubles and that cost them a little, but all in all a talented team, a playoff team, was playing up to its potential now. The bad luck hadn't been replaced by good luck but it had been mitigated by a long stretch where things were pretty even. They were back in first place. All that was left at this point was to incorporate the injured players as they came back and cruise to victory. Instead the Nats suffered a reeling 1-2 combo.
Jun 9 - Jun 26 5-11 (4.8-11.2, 49 wins)
Now here's part 1 where the season changed. It was understood the Nats would need to reincorporate Eaton, who'd been out most of the year, and Murphy, who'd been out all year. They figured they'd bring them in and probably get even better. However, injury returns can be tricky. It wasn't out of the question that they might suffer a little. But they didn't suffer a little - they suffered a lot. These guys struggled, Bryce struggled, and Roark and Gio went off the rails. What should have been a period where the Nats went around .500 and held ground instead became a time where they crashed and burned. Thanks to some hot play from NL East rivals, they found themselves 4 games out.
They played extremely poorly and had no one to blame but themselves for the bad position they were in. It wasn't bad luck at this point. Nearly half way into a season being under 2 games off by pythag is nothing. It wasn't injury. They were healthy now. It was the Nats. They deserved to be where they were, set up for a fall.
Jun 28 - Jul 4 1-6 (3.1-3.9, 72 wins)
And here's part 2. The Nats would suffer 4 one-run losses in 5 games. This run of bad luck would put the team behind the 8 ball for the remainder of the season. But please note - they didn't particularly play well here. Even looking at RS/RA, they weren't playing .500 ball against the good teams.
Jul 5 - Jul 15 6-5 (6.3-4.7, 93 wins)
So now the Nats were forced now to play catch-up. The good part is that they had a couple of easy stretches to get back in the race both before and after the ASB. If they could play like they did during May the Nats would make up the ground they needed. Maybe not all of it, but a large chunk, setting the team up for a fight in August and September. However, the Nats before the All-Star break were not impressive. They didn't dominate, but instead were merely ok against a soft bunch of teams which isn't good enough to make a real playoff run. There was the loss of Doolittle at this time but a team in the dog days is going to have to work around injuries.
To summarize: The Nats up until the injured guys came back were in contention and not terribly unlucky. Injuries cost them a few games but things were fine. Then the Nats would play a month-plus of baseball that was not playoff worthy. They would play terrible for half that time. They would play poorly and catch some bad luck. They would play middling and not make up ground. The Nats were in position. The Nats failed. Even with even luck, the now healthy Nats should have only went something like 14/15-19/20. Strip away the excuses and for this month, there's a mediocre team underneath.
Jul 20 - Aug 5 9-6 (10.7-4.3, 115 wins)
After the ASB was better. Rizzo went a little nuts, trading away Kintzler and Kelley trying to force team unity. That is a risky move but the schedule was soft and if you were going to try something like this now was the time. And to be fair the Nats did respond and played this stretch like they should. For a brief two and a half week period the Nats were a playoff deserving squad again. On the down side they lost Strasburg and a good starting pitcher is a hard thing to cover for without a deal. They chose not to trade for anything. They didn't make up much ground in the division, but made some gains in the Wild Card race and set up a possible exciting finish, though at this point it was feeling like the normal playoff pace wouldn't do it and more would be needed.
Aug 7 - Aug 19 5-9 (6.3-7.7, 73 wins)
Turns out it didn't matter because the Nats couldn't even hit the normal playoff pace. Again the team wilted in the face of good competition and their season was relegated to "miracle please". Once again a goal wasn't reached.
So now over the past 2+ months of baseball (Early June to Mid August) the Nats primarily played like a non-playoff team. Did they suffer bad luck? Sure. Did injuries cost them that first month? Definitely. But the main reason the Nats weren't contending was the Nats, when healthy and not seeing the ball bounce the wrong way, were not playing well.
Aug 21 - Sep 4 7-7 (7.6-6.4, 87 wins)
For completeness (doesn't count yesterday bc I did this last night). At this point, a reeling Phillies team would help the Nats stay .500 but they'd lose series to the Marlins and Mets, meaning not good against the bad. Then top it off with losses to the Brewers and Cards - not good against the good. The Nats were a different team now. Murphy had been dealt. Adams had been dealt. Gio and Madson would go at the trade deadline. It's hard to say this team could do any better than they have. But they certainly haven't overperformed.
The Nats were dealt a raw hand with the luck and the injuries but they also played worse than expected for a good chunk of the season. Where you want to lay the blame for that is up to you but you can't just blame outside forces. The problems were internal this season and it's that base that allowed everything else to turn this team into one fighting for .500.
*remember in general you go for around .500 against the good team, around 100+ win pace for the bad teams. Assuming relatively even distribution of these games you finish in the low 90s.
Tuesday, September 04, 2018
Tuesday Quickie : Updating for Updates sake
4 Week Status
Record: 69-69
Ground gained/lost in division last wk : +2 games to PHI, +1 games to ATL
Ground gained/lost in WC race last wk : +1 to STL, +1 SFG, -1 MIL, -1 LAD, +1 PIT, 0 COL, +2.5 ARI
It's not like the Nats are crushing it. Who's winning all these games?
Anyway - the Nats are making their move! At this pace the Nats will take first place from Atlanta on October 29th. Of course the season ends well before that but moral victories are still victories? If we're lucky the Nats will hold onto this pacing for another week and then they can either (1) play spoiler and deal a finishing blow to the Phillies playoff hopes or (2) go on a crazy run in those 6 games against Philly and Atlanta (and at this point that means 6-0) and give us something to talk about for a moment longer.
CY YOUNG RACE
Scherzer : 16-6 2.28 ERA, 0.878 WHIP, 12.1 K/9, 2.1 BB/9, 1.0 HR/9 (2.73 FIP)
deGrom 8-8 1.68 ERA, 0.963 WHIP, 11.0 K/9, 2.0 BB/9, 0.4 HR/9 (2.07 FIP)
(and by popular request) Nola : 15-4 2.23 ERA, 0.974 WHIP, 9.3 K/9, 2.4 BB/9, 0.5 HR/9 (2.76 FIP)
Basically what the above says is that deGrom is the best pitcher in the NL and Scherzer is slightly better than Nola, but Nola is right behind in wins and a little ahead in ERA. If Nola can squeak by in wins he may get more votes than Max. UNLESS, Max makes a serious run at 300 Ks which is something we haven't seen in a while. Either way deGrom vs one of these two becomes another proxy vote about the importance of pitching wins. Voters pretty much decided that with Felix a few years ago but can they vote someone in with under 10 wins? A losing record? I think if nothing changes stats wise and neither happen - so DeGrom wins 10+ and finished .500 or better - he wins hands down. If he doesn't it could go any direction. Still looks like an award decided by who blinks first.
ROY Race
Soto : .302 / .419 / .517 16 HR, 2 SB (in 392 PAs)
Acuna : .292 / .357 / .568 23 HR, 11 SB (in 373 PAs)
Soto has been hot since we last checked in (over .400 BA) but Acuna hasn't cooled down (.333 BA) and nothing about the game has changed. Do you prefer great patience with good power (3 XBH, 1 HR, 7 BB since then) or great power and adequate patience (5 XBH, 2HR, 3 BB since? Much like the Cy Young this could be determined by the batting equivalent of one bad start - one bad week. Right now I still like Acuna but if Soto can keep the average over .300 that has some psychological points.
Record: 69-69
Ground gained/lost in division last wk : +2 games to PHI, +1 games to ATL
Ground gained/lost in WC race last wk : +1 to STL, +1 SFG, -1 MIL, -1 LAD, +1 PIT, 0 COL, +2.5 ARI
It's not like the Nats are crushing it. Who's winning all these games?
Anyway - the Nats are making their move! At this pace the Nats will take first place from Atlanta on October 29th. Of course the season ends well before that but moral victories are still victories? If we're lucky the Nats will hold onto this pacing for another week and then they can either (1) play spoiler and deal a finishing blow to the Phillies playoff hopes or (2) go on a crazy run in those 6 games against Philly and Atlanta (and at this point that means 6-0) and give us something to talk about for a moment longer.
CY YOUNG RACE
Scherzer : 16-6 2.28 ERA, 0.878 WHIP, 12.1 K/9, 2.1 BB/9, 1.0 HR/9 (2.73 FIP)
deGrom 8-8 1.68 ERA, 0.963 WHIP, 11.0 K/9, 2.0 BB/9, 0.4 HR/9 (2.07 FIP)
(and by popular request) Nola : 15-4 2.23 ERA, 0.974 WHIP, 9.3 K/9, 2.4 BB/9, 0.5 HR/9 (2.76 FIP)
Basically what the above says is that deGrom is the best pitcher in the NL and Scherzer is slightly better than Nola, but Nola is right behind in wins and a little ahead in ERA. If Nola can squeak by in wins he may get more votes than Max. UNLESS, Max makes a serious run at 300 Ks which is something we haven't seen in a while. Either way deGrom vs one of these two becomes another proxy vote about the importance of pitching wins. Voters pretty much decided that with Felix a few years ago but can they vote someone in with under 10 wins? A losing record? I think if nothing changes stats wise and neither happen - so DeGrom wins 10+ and finished .500 or better - he wins hands down. If he doesn't it could go any direction. Still looks like an award decided by who blinks first.
ROY Race
Soto : .302 / .419 / .517 16 HR, 2 SB (in 392 PAs)
Acuna : .292 / .357 / .568 23 HR, 11 SB (in 373 PAs)
Soto has been hot since we last checked in (over .400 BA) but Acuna hasn't cooled down (.333 BA) and nothing about the game has changed. Do you prefer great patience with good power (3 XBH, 1 HR, 7 BB since then) or great power and adequate patience (5 XBH, 2HR, 3 BB since? Much like the Cy Young this could be determined by the batting equivalent of one bad start - one bad week. Right now I still like Acuna but if Soto can keep the average over .300 that has some psychological points.
Friday, August 31, 2018
Visiting Friends
How are old Nats doing you might ask bored with nothing else to talk about. Let me tell you!
Classic Nats
Tyler Moore is out of the league. Roger Bernadina is burning down Korean baseball. Over .300 with 19 homers so far this year. Danny Espinosa has spent this year giving organizational depth to 3 teams (Phillies now). I wouldn't expect another. Same thing goes for LOMBO, now in AAA with the A's. . Ross Detwiler, also org depth but getting one start this year in the majors for Seattle, might be also in his last season, too but you never know with lefty arms. Craig Stammen is putting up impressive relief numbers in San Diego. Clippard is putting up ok ones in Toronto appearing in a bunch of games as usual. Neither got traded because the reliever market was a buyer's one this year. Drew Storen is recovering from Tommy John and coming off a bad year - a double whammy heading into free agency. Jordan Zimmerman finally got healthy and is slowly getting back into form, though right now he's still a 3-4 middle rotation pitcher. Ian Desmond is being streaky Ian - flashing some pop with low average, but with the Rockies he's headed for his 7th straight winning season and maybe his third playoffs since leaving the Nats three years ago. Maybe the Nats needed him not Werth? Wilson Ramos got traded to Philly and is crushing it there. The guy can hit if he can stay healthy and should find a place somewhere heading into FA.
Traded or moved on Major League Nats
You all know Blake Treinen has become the best closer in baseball. 0.95 ERA! What you probably don't know is Felipe Vazquez neeeeeee Rivero regained his form in the 2nd half and was almost that good throwing to a 1.23 ERA. Although he did miss time to injury so it's only been 14 appearances. Steven Souza got hurt and is playing 4th OF ball for Arizona. Jerry Blevins has been fine. Jose Lobaton caught on with the Mets, hit oddly well in Vegas and then expectedly terrible for the Mets. Doug Fister was eating innings for Texas before going out for the year. Sandy Leon is still a bad back-up for the Red Sox showing anyone can fluke - even for half a season. Adam Lind caught on with the Yankees and then the Red Sox but his "what am I doing in AAA" play has kept him in the minors all year. Nate Karns and Yunel Escobar are out of baseball.
Traded minor league Nats
Tyler Watson SP (Kintzler) struggling badly in High A. McKenzie Mills SP (Kendrick) progressed to AA but got hammered there. Jesus Luzardo SP and Sheldon Neuse 2B/3B (Doolittle Madson) have both made it to AAA. Luzardo at 20 is way ahead of schedule but hasn't quite graduated yet as AAA has been rough. Probably a IP issue as much as anything. Neuse is on age track to debut but will have to prove he deserves it next season, because this year was very mediocre. Jeffrey Rosa now RP (Enny Romero) can't make it out of rookie ball and should be done. Mario Sanchez RP (Jimmy Cordero) was looking maybe ok in AA but got hurt. Pedro Avila SP (Norris) is going nowhere in High A but a live arm should give him more time. Reynaldo Lopes, Lucas Giolito, and Dane Dunning (Eaton) have differing fortunes. Dunning is doing pretty well in AA and is probably expected to show up in the majors next year if he doesn't bomb. Giolito struggled mightily earlier but has slowly got his control in order and looks to be a solid middle rotation arm as the year ends. Lopez has been a back of the rotation arm much of the year but also has been a little better toward the end. All together they could be a 3-4-5 for a few years.
Max Schrock 2B (Rzepczynski) got move to St. Louis and has been as mediocre as Neuse in AAA. Taylor Hearn SP (Melancon) is now trying to put it together in AA for Texas. Nick Pivetta (Papelbon) you've seen trying to figure out if he's a middle rotation arm or a back of the rotation one, but a major leaguer regardless. Tony Renda 2B (Dan Carpenter? I guess the Nats traded for Dan Carpenter) ended up with Boston and got an at bat but is org depth. Travis Ott RP (part of Turner Ross deal) is being converted to a reliever despite pretty successful showings as a SP the last couple years because the Rays are idiots trying to ruin baseball. Zach Walters SS (AssCab) one of Boz's "could be an All-Star" is out of baseball. Billy Burns OF (Blevins) is org depth in KC. Ian Krol RP (Fister) is in the Mets org now and probably will pop up again as bullpen filler. Robbie Ray SP (Fister) developed after a trade to Arizona into a solid to good starter but got hurt this year and is trying to get back to what he can do. Ivan Pinyero RP (Scott Hairston) refuses to give up the ghost and filled out the Angels AAA roster this year but still hasn't seen (or really deserve to see) the majors. And finally Alex Meyer SP (Span) escaped the SP Death Camp that was the Twins for 15 years and got to LA, developed into a pretty promising starter and then hurt his shoulder and has been out for the year.
Anyone you don't see here is probably out of baseball. You can look it up yourself lazy bones.
Whenever I do this I am taken back by how little these trades usually mean. A lot more guys becoming nothing than something and those becoming something usually taking time and a couple of deals to do it. The only real "Oops" of the past few years was Pivetta who pretty quickly became a major league quality arm for Philly. Kind of a reverse Roark deal. Luzardo has a chance to be special which would be another "Oops" but if he develops into a mid-back rotation guy (and Neuse becomes nothing) that's probably a fair shake out for 2 years of Madson and 3+ of Doolittle.
But part of that is that there are very few stars in baseball. It's going to take a pretty big mistake or unlucky/lucky break to make a deal really look bad/good.
Classic Nats
Tyler Moore is out of the league. Roger Bernadina is burning down Korean baseball. Over .300 with 19 homers so far this year. Danny Espinosa has spent this year giving organizational depth to 3 teams (Phillies now). I wouldn't expect another. Same thing goes for LOMBO, now in AAA with the A's. . Ross Detwiler, also org depth but getting one start this year in the majors for Seattle, might be also in his last season, too but you never know with lefty arms. Craig Stammen is putting up impressive relief numbers in San Diego. Clippard is putting up ok ones in Toronto appearing in a bunch of games as usual. Neither got traded because the reliever market was a buyer's one this year. Drew Storen is recovering from Tommy John and coming off a bad year - a double whammy heading into free agency. Jordan Zimmerman finally got healthy and is slowly getting back into form, though right now he's still a 3-4 middle rotation pitcher. Ian Desmond is being streaky Ian - flashing some pop with low average, but with the Rockies he's headed for his 7th straight winning season and maybe his third playoffs since leaving the Nats three years ago. Maybe the Nats needed him not Werth? Wilson Ramos got traded to Philly and is crushing it there. The guy can hit if he can stay healthy and should find a place somewhere heading into FA.
Traded or moved on Major League Nats
You all know Blake Treinen has become the best closer in baseball. 0.95 ERA! What you probably don't know is Felipe Vazquez neeeeeee Rivero regained his form in the 2nd half and was almost that good throwing to a 1.23 ERA. Although he did miss time to injury so it's only been 14 appearances. Steven Souza got hurt and is playing 4th OF ball for Arizona. Jerry Blevins has been fine. Jose Lobaton caught on with the Mets, hit oddly well in Vegas and then expectedly terrible for the Mets. Doug Fister was eating innings for Texas before going out for the year. Sandy Leon is still a bad back-up for the Red Sox showing anyone can fluke - even for half a season. Adam Lind caught on with the Yankees and then the Red Sox but his "what am I doing in AAA" play has kept him in the minors all year. Nate Karns and Yunel Escobar are out of baseball.
Traded minor league Nats
Tyler Watson SP (Kintzler) struggling badly in High A. McKenzie Mills SP (Kendrick) progressed to AA but got hammered there. Jesus Luzardo SP and Sheldon Neuse 2B/3B (Doolittle Madson) have both made it to AAA. Luzardo at 20 is way ahead of schedule but hasn't quite graduated yet as AAA has been rough. Probably a IP issue as much as anything. Neuse is on age track to debut but will have to prove he deserves it next season, because this year was very mediocre. Jeffrey Rosa now RP (Enny Romero) can't make it out of rookie ball and should be done. Mario Sanchez RP (Jimmy Cordero) was looking maybe ok in AA but got hurt. Pedro Avila SP (Norris) is going nowhere in High A but a live arm should give him more time. Reynaldo Lopes, Lucas Giolito, and Dane Dunning (Eaton) have differing fortunes. Dunning is doing pretty well in AA and is probably expected to show up in the majors next year if he doesn't bomb. Giolito struggled mightily earlier but has slowly got his control in order and looks to be a solid middle rotation arm as the year ends. Lopez has been a back of the rotation arm much of the year but also has been a little better toward the end. All together they could be a 3-4-5 for a few years.
Max Schrock 2B (Rzepczynski) got move to St. Louis and has been as mediocre as Neuse in AAA. Taylor Hearn SP (Melancon) is now trying to put it together in AA for Texas. Nick Pivetta (Papelbon) you've seen trying to figure out if he's a middle rotation arm or a back of the rotation one, but a major leaguer regardless. Tony Renda 2B (Dan Carpenter? I guess the Nats traded for Dan Carpenter) ended up with Boston and got an at bat but is org depth. Travis Ott RP (part of Turner Ross deal) is being converted to a reliever despite pretty successful showings as a SP the last couple years because the Rays are idiots trying to ruin baseball. Zach Walters SS (AssCab) one of Boz's "could be an All-Star" is out of baseball. Billy Burns OF (Blevins) is org depth in KC. Ian Krol RP (Fister) is in the Mets org now and probably will pop up again as bullpen filler. Robbie Ray SP (Fister) developed after a trade to Arizona into a solid to good starter but got hurt this year and is trying to get back to what he can do. Ivan Pinyero RP (Scott Hairston) refuses to give up the ghost and filled out the Angels AAA roster this year but still hasn't seen (or really deserve to see) the majors. And finally Alex Meyer SP (Span) escaped the SP Death Camp that was the Twins for 15 years and got to LA, developed into a pretty promising starter and then hurt his shoulder and has been out for the year.
Anyone you don't see here is probably out of baseball. You can look it up yourself lazy bones.
Whenever I do this I am taken back by how little these trades usually mean. A lot more guys becoming nothing than something and those becoming something usually taking time and a couple of deals to do it. The only real "Oops" of the past few years was Pivetta who pretty quickly became a major league quality arm for Philly. Kind of a reverse Roark deal. Luzardo has a chance to be special which would be another "Oops" but if he develops into a mid-back rotation guy (and Neuse becomes nothing) that's probably a fair shake out for 2 years of Madson and 3+ of Doolittle.
But part of that is that there are very few stars in baseball. It's going to take a pretty big mistake or unlucky/lucky break to make a deal really look bad/good.
Thursday, August 30, 2018
What's the future?
After the season the Nats are going to be looking to make moves. They have to as there will be obvious holes to address even if everyone is back. It could be tweaking, they are a better team then they have shown and with health, luck, and some smart moves, could be right back in the division hunt. It could be major, they were pretty old, don't have a lot of youthful answers to problems, and have more key guys coming up for free agency after 2019. Either way the team lands some moves will be made and that got me thinking - what exactly is the future for the Nats at each position?
I'm not even talking about the far off future. Anything beyond 3 years I tend to avoid talking about because that is a long time in sports and a lot can change. I'm just talking about the next two years. Do the Nats have a plan in place for that limited time frame? A little preview of the position specific posts I do at year's end.
First Base - Not really. Zimm remains a quality bat when healthy, primarily against LHP. Zimm also remains unable to stay healthy. I suppose another Lind/Adams type would be likely but there isn't anything in place. He is up for a buyout after 2019 which the Nats will likely take rather than pay his 18 million dollar salary. So there's a plan here for 2019 but not 2020.
Second Base - No. Difo is not the answer. They haven't begun moving Carter Kieboom, and even if they did he doesn't currently look like he'll be an important piece in the next two seasons. Luis Garcia may be the answer down the road but not in the next two years. No plan
Shortstop - Yes. Turner will play shortstop. He hasn't developed exactly as you'd like (which is probably why they haven't committed to moving Kieboom) but he's improved defensively and has shown you offensive flashes that can be exciting. Plus he's cheap for a good long while.
Third base - No. The plan for 2019 is obvious. Rendon plays. He can hit. He can field. But he becomes a FA after 2019 and will be an injury prone 30 year old in the 2020 season. Are the Nats going to pay for that? Like first base, plan for 2019, none for 2020.
Outfield - Yes! Soto in now in there in pen. Eaton technically has a buy out but his contract is so cheap (9.5 million) that you'd keep him unless he misses 80% of next season too. MAT is still under control. The Nats like Robles. Even without Bryce you can see what the plan would be. Start Soto, Eaton, MAT - work in Robles. See what sticks. So there's a plan in place already.
Catcher - No. Wieters will be gone. Severino showed everyone he can't hit (LIKE I SAID HE WOULD) Kieboom the Older (really - he'll be 28 next year) is not the answer either there's no plan here.
Starting Pitching - No team is going to have a plan in place for all 5 slots for 2 years.* I'd say if you have 3 spots set you are doing very well. The Nats aren't there and worse, the whole thing could be in chaos in 2020. Let's get the one sure thing out of the way. Max is signed and despite getting up there in years will have to show that he's not worth the ace status. 2019 looks acceptable for the Nats Stras and Roark going 2-3 forming a very good top. The bottom is dicey, with no one banging on the door it's very likely that something like a re-signed Hellickson and Jefry Rodriguez could round out the rotation. But this is kind of par for course in the majors. 2020 is where the trouble starts. Roark is a FA after 2019. Stras has an opt-out. If they both are walking the Nats now need 4 slots filled. In the minors, Seth Romero didn't climb. Wil Crowe has stalled out in AA. Fedde is hurt again and wasn't impressive in his chances. One may have a good enough 2019 to show up in the rotation in 2020 but there's no confidence here for 2020.
Relief pitching - Like Eaton, Doolittle has some buyouts / team options but is cheap enough he should be around. After that it's anyone's guess. Kintzler was pencilled in for 2019 but now is gone. They were hoping guys like Gott and Glover would be dominant by now but both are barely hanging on. There's a couple of ok arms like Miller, Suero, and Grace under control but it's a piecemeal pen right now for the next two years.
So in conclusion
For 2019 the Nats have a plan in place for first, short, third, the outfield, the top 3 rotation spots, and the closer. That's not too bad and includes a good deal of solid players or better. You can see how they could compete with a little tweaking. You bring in a lot of bullpen help, a solid pitcher, a star at catcher or MI and you are close to reset
For 2020 the Nats have a plan in place for short, the outfield, the top rotation spot and closer. That's not much to work with and is kind of a team that you decide to rebuild not reload.
This seems like a pretty clear cut case and we'll see how the Nats react in the offseason. They could reload with an honest chance at taking back the division in 2019 and remaining competitive beyond that if a few things break their way. They could sell hard taking assets like Roark and Rendon and Doolittle (assuming health) and maybe even Eaton and Strasburg, and try to reset for the Soto/Robles era in 2021 and beyond. There's even a third path. A hard buy for 2019 alone. A lot of one-year deals, early opt-outs, that reload for the chance at the title in 2019, but gives them freedom to tear it all back down if they come up short rather than be stuck with some dead money as they might be if they try and reload.
If I'm guessing? I think they don't fall easily into any one of these categories. I think Rizzo is just a long term hoarder and he'll bring in some long-term talent through trade or signings next off-season. Not enough to reload, but enough that the team should be ok and could be great if they get lucky. It'll probably be something that doesn't get them a division in 2019, but maybe a WC and keeps them in that 85ish win range looking to pounce on a fast start. No fire sale. No big reload. No 2019 grasp. Just continued solid but not spectacular roster management.
*Well ok - the 2012 Nats kind of did. It's possible. But it's a rare thing and it's usually actually 4 guys set and one "we'll try our young guys" or "we'll sign a cheap vet" 5th position spot. Which is a plan, but not one where you have any idea what you are getting.
I'm not even talking about the far off future. Anything beyond 3 years I tend to avoid talking about because that is a long time in sports and a lot can change. I'm just talking about the next two years. Do the Nats have a plan in place for that limited time frame? A little preview of the position specific posts I do at year's end.
First Base - Not really. Zimm remains a quality bat when healthy, primarily against LHP. Zimm also remains unable to stay healthy. I suppose another Lind/Adams type would be likely but there isn't anything in place. He is up for a buyout after 2019 which the Nats will likely take rather than pay his 18 million dollar salary. So there's a plan here for 2019 but not 2020.
Second Base - No. Difo is not the answer. They haven't begun moving Carter Kieboom, and even if they did he doesn't currently look like he'll be an important piece in the next two seasons. Luis Garcia may be the answer down the road but not in the next two years. No plan
Shortstop - Yes. Turner will play shortstop. He hasn't developed exactly as you'd like (which is probably why they haven't committed to moving Kieboom) but he's improved defensively and has shown you offensive flashes that can be exciting. Plus he's cheap for a good long while.
Third base - No. The plan for 2019 is obvious. Rendon plays. He can hit. He can field. But he becomes a FA after 2019 and will be an injury prone 30 year old in the 2020 season. Are the Nats going to pay for that? Like first base, plan for 2019, none for 2020.
Outfield - Yes! Soto in now in there in pen. Eaton technically has a buy out but his contract is so cheap (9.5 million) that you'd keep him unless he misses 80% of next season too. MAT is still under control. The Nats like Robles. Even without Bryce you can see what the plan would be. Start Soto, Eaton, MAT - work in Robles. See what sticks. So there's a plan in place already.
Catcher - No. Wieters will be gone. Severino showed everyone he can't hit (LIKE I SAID HE WOULD) Kieboom the Older (really - he'll be 28 next year) is not the answer either there's no plan here.
Starting Pitching - No team is going to have a plan in place for all 5 slots for 2 years.* I'd say if you have 3 spots set you are doing very well. The Nats aren't there and worse, the whole thing could be in chaos in 2020. Let's get the one sure thing out of the way. Max is signed and despite getting up there in years will have to show that he's not worth the ace status. 2019 looks acceptable for the Nats Stras and Roark going 2-3 forming a very good top. The bottom is dicey, with no one banging on the door it's very likely that something like a re-signed Hellickson and Jefry Rodriguez could round out the rotation. But this is kind of par for course in the majors. 2020 is where the trouble starts. Roark is a FA after 2019. Stras has an opt-out. If they both are walking the Nats now need 4 slots filled. In the minors, Seth Romero didn't climb. Wil Crowe has stalled out in AA. Fedde is hurt again and wasn't impressive in his chances. One may have a good enough 2019 to show up in the rotation in 2020 but there's no confidence here for 2020.
Relief pitching - Like Eaton, Doolittle has some buyouts / team options but is cheap enough he should be around. After that it's anyone's guess. Kintzler was pencilled in for 2019 but now is gone. They were hoping guys like Gott and Glover would be dominant by now but both are barely hanging on. There's a couple of ok arms like Miller, Suero, and Grace under control but it's a piecemeal pen right now for the next two years.
So in conclusion
For 2019 the Nats have a plan in place for first, short, third, the outfield, the top 3 rotation spots, and the closer. That's not too bad and includes a good deal of solid players or better. You can see how they could compete with a little tweaking. You bring in a lot of bullpen help, a solid pitcher, a star at catcher or MI and you are close to reset
For 2020 the Nats have a plan in place for short, the outfield, the top rotation spot and closer. That's not much to work with and is kind of a team that you decide to rebuild not reload.
This seems like a pretty clear cut case and we'll see how the Nats react in the offseason. They could reload with an honest chance at taking back the division in 2019 and remaining competitive beyond that if a few things break their way. They could sell hard taking assets like Roark and Rendon and Doolittle (assuming health) and maybe even Eaton and Strasburg, and try to reset for the Soto/Robles era in 2021 and beyond. There's even a third path. A hard buy for 2019 alone. A lot of one-year deals, early opt-outs, that reload for the chance at the title in 2019, but gives them freedom to tear it all back down if they come up short rather than be stuck with some dead money as they might be if they try and reload.
If I'm guessing? I think they don't fall easily into any one of these categories. I think Rizzo is just a long term hoarder and he'll bring in some long-term talent through trade or signings next off-season. Not enough to reload, but enough that the team should be ok and could be great if they get lucky. It'll probably be something that doesn't get them a division in 2019, but maybe a WC and keeps them in that 85ish win range looking to pounce on a fast start. No fire sale. No big reload. No 2019 grasp. Just continued solid but not spectacular roster management.
*Well ok - the 2012 Nats kind of did. It's possible. But it's a rare thing and it's usually actually 4 guys set and one "we'll try our young guys" or "we'll sign a cheap vet" 5th position spot. Which is a plan, but not one where you have any idea what you are getting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)