I suppose it is only fitting that, one year after we “won” the 2024 draft lottery (but were ineligible because of being classified a “big market team” despite the fact that we get the exact same amount of RSN revenue as the Baltimore Orioles by rule, and they’re considered a “small market team” that literally gets Competitive Balance picks every year … but I digress), the Nats “won” the 2025 Draft Lottery and will pick 1st overall in the 2025 draft. We had the 4th best chance (around 10% overall) of getting picked, and we got lucky for the 2nd year in a row.
We’ll now have the 3rd #1 overall pick in the history of the franchise. The first two worked out pretty well … so expectations are pretty high. Based on the current state of the qualifying offer and other comp picks, the Nats will pick 1st overall, then have the 49th pick overall in the 2nd round, the 87th overall pick in the third round, and then roughly every 30 picks there on out (some teams are already forfeiting 5th rounders with QO-assigned FA signings, so we won’t know the exact draft order for the top 5 rounds for a while).
Bonus pools will be announced later, but by virtue of having #1 overall, we’ll have a massive pool to work with. The first pick alone will probably be worth close to $11M (last year’s #1 overall draft slot was worth $10.5m), which is important because the #1 overall pick will not sign for anywhere close to that figure (Travis Bazzana, last year’s 1-1 pick, signed for $8.95M, which gave Cleveland an extra $1.5M to work with), which means the Nats may have some major flexibility to sign another Luke Dickerson-type in the upper rounds and essentially get an additional 1st-round quality guy.
So, all that said, who is in the mix right now for 1-1 overall in 2025? Here’s a few names that have been in play since I started tracking the 2025 draft class. Remember, lots can change in a draft class once the baseball season starts next spring, but for now, there’s two HS guys and a handful of college guys at the top of most draft boards.
Prep guys:
- Ethan Holliday, SS, Stillwater HS, Oklahoma. The brother of 2022 1-1 overall pick Jackson Holliday, son of Matt Holliday. Ok State commit. Consensus 1-1 pick as of Dec 2024 pre 2025 season on several draft boards.
- Seth Hernandez, RHP, Elite Charter Academy HS, Temecula, Calif. Vanderbilt commit. 90-93, reaching 95 as HS sophomore. Top prep arm on board, projecting top 10 of 1st round, improving late 2024.
College guys:
- Jace Laviolette, RF TAMU. D1 Fresh AA. 20/20 season as a freshman. Risen to be 2025 1-1 candidate with 29-HR sophomore season.
- Jamie Arnold, LHP Starter from Florida State. 11-3, 2.98 ERA as sophomore in ACC.
- Tyler Bremner, RHP UC Santa Barbara. blew up in 2024, going 11-1 with 2.54 ERA and 104/21 K/BB in 88 IP. Top RHP on board.
- Cam Cannarella, SS/CF Clemson. D1 fresh AA, ACC Fresh of the year. slashed .388/.462/.560, Team Usa. Took a small step back sophomore year, went from 24SBs to zero (why?) but power stayed put.
- Caden Bodine, C, Coastal Carolina. slashed .367/.456/.609 with 17 homers, Sun Belt Fresh of year, then continued in Cape with Wood to vault to top 10 status. Numbers fell across the board soph season, dinging prospect status.
One last comment. I’ve already seen some comments about Laviolette in particular, which are along the lines of, “well we already have plenty of outfielders, we should draft for need.” YOU DO NOT DRAFT FOR NEED IN BASEBALL. This isn’t the NBA, where you draft someone to immediately go into the 5-man starting lineup and you have to consider who you have in your current point guard position and how long they’re signed for; this is baseball, where players move around positions, where they may look great now but hit a plateau at AA or AAA, or get hurt and miss two seasons (ahem Cavalli). You draft the Best Player Available and if/when that player starts to push an existing veteran, so be it; you cross that bridge when you get there.
Right now, on December 11th, 2024, the #1 pick projection is absolutely Ethan Holliday. His brother destroyed the minor leagues, was the #1 prospect in baseball for most of 2024 and debuted as a 20yr old. Ethan is not his brother: he’s 4-inches taller and projects more like a corner bat/corner outfielder like his father versus a 6-0″ agile defender like his brother. If you told me Ethan would have his dad’s career right now, I’d take it (44 bWAR, 300homers, career .300 hitter with power). Sign me up.
It’s great to dream on a player … but you just never know what can happen in a spring baseball season. The #1 overall pick we get may be someone we’ve never heard of. Paul Skenes went from a decent Air Force hurler in a nothing conference to a guy putting up circus strikeout numbers at LSU in a year, to being the All Star Game starter and nearly winning the Cy Young in his rookie season … so we’ll see what happens as the spring season unfolds.
All that said, this is a great event for the franchise and could absolutely help lead the team back to a decade of prosperity.
Here’s a couple of scouting reports on Holliday.
Todd Boss
11 Dec 24 at 10:07 am
From Baseball America: SS/3B: Ht: 6’4″ | Wt: 195 | B-T: L-R
School: Stillwater (Okla.) HS. Committed: Oklahoma State. Age At Draft: 18.4
Orioles shortstop Jackson Holliday—son of seven time all-star outfielder Matt Holliday—was the No. 1 overall pick in the 2022 draft out of high school. Like the Upton brothers when B.J. was the No. 2 overall pick in the 2002 draft and Justin went No. 1 overall in 2005, Ethan Holliday could join his older brother as another elite draft pick. Scouts have seen Ethan plenty of times already since he was a freshman when he was high school teammates with Jackson during his 2022 draft year, and Ethan has grown bigger and stronger since then. Built more like his father than his brother, Ethan’s ease of operation in the batter’s box stands out. Holliday showcases a smooth, compact swing from the left side with good rhythm and balance. He tracks pitches extremely well, maintaining a disciplined approach to draw plenty of walks. There is some swing-and-miss to his game, but Holliday has a mature offensive mindset, controlling the strike zone and using the whole field. Holliday drives the ball well now and doesn’t have to sell out to generate that power, with the upside to develop into a 30-plus home run threat. At shortstop, Holliday is a fundamentally sound defender for his age, though at his size, there’s a good chance he outgrows the position and ends up at third base in pro ball, with the middle-of-the-order offensive upside that would project well in a corner outfield spot too.
Todd Boss
11 Dec 24 at 10:08 am
from MLB Pipeline: Scouting grades: Hit: 50 | Power: 65 | Run: 50 | Arm: 55 | Field: 50 | Overall: 60
Ever since Jackson Holliday went No. 1 overall in the 2022 Draft, he has told people that his younger brother is better than he was at the same stage. Ethan is more physical and powerful than Jackson and much more closely resembles their father, seven-time All-Star Matt. Both brothers scuffled on the showcase circuit entering their Draft years, but while Jackson was considered a second-round talent at that point, Ethan is a leading candidate to get taken No. 1 in July.
Holliday may have the most usable left-handed power in the Draft and he generates it with little effort. Still adding to his 6-foot-4 frame, he already has plenty of strength and an easy left-handed swing with plenty of bat speed and leverage. He tried to do too much when he got pitched around on the circuit last summer, leading to some swing-and-miss concerns, but he should develop into at least an average hitter with 35-homer pop and plenty of walks.
Holliday moves well for his size and has average speed, though he’ll probably lose a step as he continues to mature physically. He has nice actions and solid arm strength at shortstop, but he won’t cover enough ground to stay there on a long-term basis. The Oklahoma State recruit projects better as a slugging third baseman and could be a quality defender on the hot corner.
Todd Boss
11 Dec 24 at 10:09 am
what makes it so hard in baseball is that you’re often comparing players who are competing at different levels.
that and just how much harder it is in the show vs even high level minor league baseball
then again, players were moved up quicker in the system this year, maybe the same would apply to a 1/1 pick. Soto arrived after 35 ABs in Harrisburg. of course his stats were eye-popping.
FredMD
11 Dec 24 at 11:00 am
@fredMD: Agree. These days though, the players selected at the very top are doing a better job fulfilling expectations.
Todd Boss
11 Dec 24 at 2:08 pm
I’ll move forward my comment from the last post. I agree that at the #1 pick, you don’t draft for need, you take the best player, particularly if he’s thought to be a generational talent. Holliday’s ceiling seems to be quite high.
The big caveat is that a lot can change between now and draft day in July. There was a lot of 1/1 conversation about both House and Green, particularly about House, and he ended up dropping quite a bit. After his college sophomore season, there was talk about Tyler Dyson being 1/1. He slid all the way to the Nats in the 5th round (and did nothing). It would have been heresy in December 2022 to suggest that Skenes would be picked before Dollander, or particularly ahead of Crews.
I’ll also note of the 2025 crop that at this point, it would take a Skenes-like spring to sway me toward a pitching prospect. None really stand out that way to me at this time.
From earlier:
I guess I should be excited, but I confess that I also groan at the thought of having to wait out the maturation of yet another high school wunderkind, yet another one with swing-and-miss issues. The profile of Holliday reads a lot like one of a LH-hitting Brady House. But I know, I know — you don’t pass on a potential “generational talent.”
One thing to watch between now and then is how well the Nats’ prospects for the third OF slot start their seasons. We can include Young in that mix if you wish, but also Lile, Hassell, Pinckney, Green, Vaquero, et al. If none of them really seizes the day, that leaves the door open for considering LaViolette. If he truly crushes it in the spring, he might still be considered anyway with the thought that he or Wood could switch to 1B or DH.
KW
11 Dec 24 at 2:56 pm
It’s also worth noting that the Nat system REALLY needs an injection of power. Will and I both posted about that at Nats Prospects recently. If I’m remembering correctly the Nats had only six players of prospect age in the system who topped 10 homers, which Will determined was the lowest number in baseball. And one of those guys was Jeremy de la Rosa, who will be lucky to still be employed after hitting .187 with a .250 OBP.
That said, there’s a lot of power POTENTIAL, particularly if you add Holliday/LaViolette to Wood, House, Crews, Morales, maybe Lomavita, bigger maybe with guys like Green. Of course that’s what baseball is now. The best teams are assembling deep lineups of mashers.
KW
11 Dec 24 at 3:09 pm
Todd is absolutely right. You draft the best player. Position need is only a tiebreaker. Remember when the Nats drafted Rendon? In addition to the concerns about his injury history, a lot of people were like “are you INSANE? The only good player on the team is a third baseman!” Thank goodness the Nats didn’t listen.
I don’t think that the Nats “got lucky two years in a row” because it’s not lucky to get picked for the #1 overall selection when you can’t have it. That’s just adding insult to injury. They should have had the #1 overall pick in 2023 but got outlucked by the Pirates and so lost their shot at Paul Skenes.
As for who the Nats should draft, I’m not even going to pay attention to that until late spring when the prospects have a little more data behind them.
John C.
11 Dec 24 at 3:17 pm
Well, the weird handling of Matt Cronin this year reached it’s culmination as he was not even protected for the minor league section of the R5 draft and so was lost. I really don’t get it.
Dave
11 Dec 24 at 3:56 pm
Re Cronin – What are the eligibility rules for minor league R5? Was there a way, short of adding him to the 40, that he could have been protected?
I had him as borderline protection candidate ahead of the major league phase. It’s very weird to see him grabbed in the minor league one, and like the 50th player taken or whatever.
SMS
11 Dec 24 at 5:27 pm
The Nats’ MLB-level Rule 5 pick: Evan Reifert, a big-armed reliever from the Rays.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=reifer000eva
He dominated at AA but hasn’t pitched above that level.
Minor-league phase, Nats selected Hyun-il Choi from the Dodgers. He’s actually pitched at higher levels than Reifert, but the Nats must see something in him that aren’t evident in his numbers:
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=choi–003hyu
KW
11 Dec 24 at 6:59 pm
Minor league R5 phase is like MLB version; if a player isn’t on the AAA roster, they can be plucked. Cronin never got put back up on AAA.
But, I agree why the F didn’t they put him on the AAA roster? So weird.
Todd Boss
11 Dec 24 at 10:52 pm
Should’ve looked here before posting on NatsProspects! You’ve already answered some of my questions. Everything about Matt Cronin over the past year is just absolutely befuddling. I’d love to get the insider take on why the Nats has acted the way they have with Cronin, because it’s so out of step with everything else.
Will
12 Dec 24 at 7:45 am
rather than join the handwringing on losing Cronin I’ll weigh in with the good news that nobody took a flyer on Alverez. having watched both the latter is a better prospect
FredMD
12 Dec 24 at 8:40 am
Amen on not losing Alvarez. As I noted during the Rule 5 discussion, he’s ahead of many Rule 5 candidates in that he’s pitched at AAA and he seems to have a healthy arm. Indeed, the Nats picked someone (in the MLB phase) who hasn’t pitched above AA. Alvarez should have a good shot at reaching the majors in 2025.
I didn’t understand their treatment of Cronin, but I’m also not losing any sleep over him. There obviously was more to that story than met the eye. This is exactly what the Rule 5 draft is for: to give guys a chance somewhere else that they weren’t getting in their current organization, for whatever reason.
KW
12 Dec 24 at 9:04 am
I certainly concur that Alvarez is a better prospect than Cronin (and, for that matter, so is Reifert), but at the risk of belaboring this a bit, I just don’t understand the mechanisms at work here.
If anyone R5 eligible due to service time and not on a AAA roster is available to be poached, why don’t teams routinely lose half a dozen fringe prospects. Made, Shuman, Sinclair, and Schoff all seem just as eligible as Cronin. Did no other team want them for free? How could that be possible when every system has at least 100 org guys?
Like Lara last year. I get why he didn’t need to be protected from major league R5 – but no one wanted to just take him for nothing? I don’t understand how that can be true.
And this is beyond the choice not to give Cronin a AAA spot and protect him – which I agree makes absolutely no sense and must mean there’s more to the story that we don’t know.
(Also I don’t think there’s any restrictions on their use by the new team for minor league R5 guys, so there’s no hope of getting Cronin back or risk of having to give back Choi.)
SMS
12 Dec 24 at 11:45 am
if the Nats thought Cronin was worth protecting he would have been. he throws low nineties with no plus second pitch. he’s always walked too many guys and the times I saw him he gave up a fair amount of hard contact.
this spring the talk was regarding Marlon Perez and why was he not promoted. how’d that work out.
other organizations have the same guys we do. they just have different names.
Lara was not MiLB Rule 5 eligible until this year (at least).
I get that we all develop favorites but the folks in charge can see the difference.
FredMD
12 Dec 24 at 1:48 pm
@FredMD – I get that all the orgs have their own fringe prospects, and that the guys we’re talking about aren’t that valuable. But they’d still be in the top half of any system in the league (of the 160 full season roster slots, not of ranked prospects obviously.)
It’s not like they’d have to release their own guy who’s their 15th best bullpen prospect to pick up our guys who would be their 20th. They can release their 45th best arm or something.
And why wasn’t Lara eligible for MiLB R5 last year? I definitely remember him being eligible for the major league phase. And he wasn’t on the AAA roster. Is there another requirement?
Pipeline name checked Christian Franklin in the Cubs system as a potential R5 target for the major league phase. He wasn’t taken, and fair enough. But how did no system want to plug him in at AAA?
https://www.fangraphs.com/players/christian-franklin/sa3017510/stats?position=OF
If you’re claiming that all these guys have functionally zero surplus value, I guess that’s possible. But public scouting reports and/or results have them as well better than the average minor leaguer, so I have a hard time believing that all 30 systems are in such lockstep about in terms of how they evaluate many of these fringe guys.
SMS
12 Dec 24 at 2:31 pm
I’m honestly having a hard time finding the guidelines for the Minor league phase of the R5 draft. All i can find is a 2021 link that says, “For the Minor League phase, any player not protected on a 38-man Triple-A roster from that same group can be selected. Any team with a full 38-man Triple-A roster is not allowed to make a selection, but teams can make as many picks as they want until they get to 38 players.”
So, inferring, it sounds to me like anyone who’s MLB rule5 eligible is also minor league R5 eligible, as long as they’re not on a AAA roster. Ok, that’s cool. So why didn’t we load up our AAA roster with these guys? We were sitting at something like 16 or 17 players on our AAA roster. We could have procedurally moved nearly every r5 eligible guy we had to AAA temporarily to hide them from the minor league phase. Unless… there’s a rule against that as well, since its such an obvious way to protect your players.
So who knows. Lara absolutely was minor league R5 last year and could have been taken.
Todd Boss
12 Dec 24 at 3:39 pm
To me, the simplest explanation as to why there aren’t a couple dozen guys on the backend of top 30 lists getting MiLB R5’d every year is that there is some layer of protection that isn’t in public write-ups. Whatever those rules are, Lara was protected last year. Probably Made and Sinclair and Schoff etc too. And that Cubs OF that Pipeline suggested. None of those guys were picked because they couldn’t be, and the only story here is that the team didn’t believe in Cronin. Fair enough.
The other possibility is that these guys don’t actually have any surplus value, that every org has plenty of guys just as good and that they aren’t worth to giving up $25k and their least useful org guy. Of course, that would force a pretty big shift in how we talk about prospects, how we judge the draft and IFA bonuses, and how we think about trades. All of that makes much more sense if the surplus value from these FV35 guys is a few hundred thousand and not zero.
I don’t see how you can give day three draft picks $100k bonuses if fringe prospects like Made and Sinclair aren’t worth $25k and a minor league roster spot. You draft those guys hoping they develop like Sinclair.
SMS
12 Dec 24 at 7:25 pm
It was absolutely the right decision to not protect Lara in 2023. Why start the options clock on a guy who hadn’t pitched above A+ and was mediocre there? He made significant improvement in 2024.
Blessedly, the Nats seem to have finally moved on from their paranoia protecting mediocre A+ guys like Adon, Antuna, and de la Rosa. They’re in a pickle now because Adon is out of options and hasn’t established himself as a major leaguer.
It apparently took them years to get over Adrian Nieto.
KW
12 Dec 24 at 8:50 pm
per Luke at nationalsprospects.com
“The AA and AAA in the phases refers to the 38- and 37-man reserve lists for AAA and AA respectively. Unlike the 40-man roster, these are not publicized so we have no idea who was on them. I have yet to see a better breakdown than this one, but it’s 15 years old. I do know that there’s no rule requiring a team to put a guy taken in the AAA phase on the AAA roster.”
this seems to provide an answer for SMS in regard how clubs avoid losing so many prospects and why we did not lose Lara.
I’m not sure it makes anybody happier if they wanted them to hang on to Cronin.
FredMD
13 Dec 24 at 10:05 am
Thanks, FredMD.
That makes a lot of sense and, as you say, explains everything except why Cronin didn’t even warrant one of those AAA reserve slots. But, hey, I’m mostly scouting statlines and I’m not going to get that worked up about the team being all the way out on a guy who I even think was their 40th best prospect.
SMS
13 Dec 24 at 1:33 pm
One almost has to wonder (w/r/t Cronin) if he was like a sh*tty clubhouse presence or something, or if he had bad work ethics. Seth Romero esque.
Todd Boss
13 Dec 24 at 2:34 pm
If Nats brass was so down on him, why bother sending him to the AFL?
Just so many mixed/contradictory moves when it comes to Cronin that make this so strange.
Will
13 Dec 24 at 2:49 pm
Routine reminder: “I don’t see the reason for [x]” =/= “there is no good reason for [x].”
And explaining to us their reasoning for [x] is not an organizational priority.
John C.
14 Dec 24 at 11:20 am
Maybe they were hoping that a lucky AFL run could attract a potential trade. Give him 10 good innings in the desert, and maybe some other team will give up their version of Jose Feliz for him. That very much didn’t happen, so they cut bait? I don’t know, and we’ll almost certainly never know. It’s been a curious path for him.
SMS
14 Dec 24 at 11:42 am
Jeez folks, let it go. We didn’t just lose the next Mariano Rivera in Rule 5. Well, Mariano Jr. maybe . . . This is starting to enter the realm of “future Hall of Famer Max Schrock.”
Cronin missed most of 2023 due to injury. Presumably the Nats let him work back into things at A+ and AA in 2024. His WHIP at AA was 1.50, with 9.2 hits per 9 and 4.3 walks per 9. His numbers overall weren’t nearly as good as they were in 2022. He’s a one-pitch pitcher who just turned 27. They did him a solid by letting him go to AZ and try to find something, but he got clobbered. If he had stayed with the organization, it probably would have been time for a difficult conversation. He likely wouldn’t have started 2025 at AAA either, at which point guys have to take a long look in the mirror.
I had very high hopes for Cronin when he was drafted, and heck, if they were going to rush a reliever to the majors in 2020, I would have sent him ahead of Lughead Romero, who had no experience as a reliever. So I’m not going out of the way to crush the guy. But I’m a lot more interested in the better relievers they need to be signing right now to the MLB and AAA rosters than I am in him.
Good luck Matt. I’ll be happy for you if you prove me wrong.
KW
14 Dec 24 at 7:27 pm
Who would you prefer?
A: .240/.329/.459, 122 wRC+, 34 HR, 31 2B, age 30
B: .293/.365/.562, 164 wRC+, 39 HR, 26 2B, age 30
C: .251/.335/.468, 119 wRC+, 26 HR, 26 2B, age 34
A is Alonso, C is Christian Walker. Both would cost a multi-year contract and the #49 draft pick. But who is B???
With the Nats not exactly burning up the free agent market, and nearly every free agent signing for even more than expected, I started looking at the list of guys who might be available for trade. I’m not really interested in guys who aren’t controlled beyond a year or two, though. That doesn’t fit with the Nats’ “window” (if we even have one yet).
B is Brent Rooker of the West Sacramento A’s. He made $750K last season and is controlled for three more years. What would you give up for him? Now, it should be noted that his best defensive position is DH, but the Nats really could use a power bat like that, even with the Ks he brings.
We’ve briefly mentioned who might be “untouchable” and who might not. One would think the A’s would want guys who are either already in the majors or on the cusp. Guys in the majors who might be available: Garcia, Young, Irvin. Certainly Stone Garrett would, although he wouldn’t have much trade value. Among those close (close-ish): Cavalli, Lord, Hassell, Wallace, Alavarez, Pinckney.
I’d start the conversation with Cavalli, Lord, and Hassell . . .
KW
15 Dec 24 at 3:11 pm
For a team still stuck in rebuild mode with a ton of open questions about the current crop of players, you tend to not want to give away the exact players who are meant to make you good in the near future, like Cavalli, Lord or Hassell.
I’m turning into a broken record here, but the only way to improve the Nats is through free agency. Otherwise, you’re just trading 2-3 WAR for Rooker in 2025-2027 for (ideally) 2-3 WAR among Cavalli/Lord/Hassell in 2026-2030.
With Walker or Alonso, you only have to give away money, and as has been pointed out frequently, with the Nats’ payroll sitting around $78m, they could sign both Walker and Alonso for $25m/season each, and still be about $25m below the median payroll, with the added advantage of not knee-capping their future talent pipeline.
Another note, the A’s have weirdly become spenders this offseason, seemingly to head off a MLBPA lawsuit, as evidenced by signing Severino for $67m, acquiring Jeffrey Springs, and been linked with a few other players. Plus, they’re in almost the exact same position as we find ourselves. In the middle of a half-baked rebuild. There’s an interesting core: Rooker, Butler and Langeliers, with some projectability/bouncebackability in Jacob Wilson, Bleday, Gelof, Soderstrom and Waldichuk. But after that, their farm is almost completely devoid of talent. Their rotation was a black hole, but Severino and Springs are great additions.
I don’t see them parting with Rooker for anything short of a king’s ransom, because it would be admitting their rebuild was a bust, when their free agency spending suggests they think they’re in it.
Will
16 Dec 24 at 11:59 am
Seeing what the Yankees gave up for Bellinger, i.e. nothing of value, I wonder why the Nats weren’t interested.
If we want to compare to KW’s players above, Bellinger batted .266/.325/.426, 109 wRC+, 18 HR, 23 2B, age 29
If you average out his past two seasons with the Cubs, it looks even better, an average of .286/.340/.475, 122 wRC+, 22 HR, 26 2B, but you never quite know which type of Bellinger you’re going to get…
Still, the Yankees only gave away Cody Poteet, your prototypical AAAA SP who can’t stay healthy. The Cubs even threw in $5m of the $52.5m still owed to Bellinger.
Bellinger is a good defensive 1B, and a good defensive OF. He’d definitely have improved our current 1B options, and added roster flexibility in being able to cover all OF positions too in case of injury to our starting 3.
It makes me wonder if there’s not some other bats out there with bad contracts that the Nats might be willing to take on, for basically no prospect value. Masataka Yoshida on the Red Sox likely doesn’t have a future with them, as their uber-prospects Campbell, Anthony and Mayer soon graduate. But Yoshida’s caused a fuss over not getting more time in the OF, despite being a terrible defender there, so I don’t think that a full time job at DH with us would be appealing to him.
There must be other bats out there who find them the odd man out.
While I didn’t expect the Nats to be big players in free agency, I must admit, I’m surprised with just how quiet we’ve been. There was exactly one poorly sourced rumor linking us to Walker, besides that I can’t recall ANY buzz around any Nats’ offseason moves. By this time last season, we’d already signed several players: Floro, Yepez, Senzel. Weird that this season we’ve been even quieter.
Will
18 Dec 24 at 7:38 am
Yeah, I had the same thought about Bellinger being given away for the nothing. The Cubs even kicked in part of his salary to make him go away.
Other contracts out there that teams would pay to make go away include Nolan Arenado and Jordan Montgomery. Arenado has a full no-trade, though.
As for “the only way to improve the Nats is through free agency,” I’m getting more and more pissed by the day as Mark Lerner pinches every penny ever tighter. That said, I don’t really want to invest in Alonso, unless they become convinced that he could be a “culture change” guy like Werth. He’s certainly big enough to beat some sense into Abrams.
What I really would debate is the unwillingness to trade. One of the main points of developing a deep farm system is to have trade assets. You obviously try to trade guys who you think aren’t going to end up being particularly good, and Rizzo has been quite good at that, all in all. They don’t all have to be mega-deals, either. They acquired a nice piece of the puzzle in Yan Gomes for DJ Johnson, Jefry Rodríguez, and Andruw Monasterio. None of those guys were really top 10 within the system. Josh Bell for Wil Crowe was a steal.
KW
18 Dec 24 at 8:47 am
Of course sometimes it’s a guess. Such as . . .
Cavalli will ultimately become the next:
A. Crowe (-0.6 WAR)
B. Fedde (5.3 WAR)
C. Giolito (12.5 WAR)
D. Roark (18.4 WAR)
E. JZim (22.1 WAR)
KW
18 Dec 24 at 9:05 am
It’s one thing to trade an OF prospect like Daniel Johnson, when your outfield is currently Bryce Harper, Juan Soto and Michael Taylor. Or Wil Crowe, when your rotation is 2020’s version of Scherzer, Strasburg, Corbin, Fedde and Ross. It’s another thing to trade Cavalli and Lord when your rotation is Gore, Irvin, Herz, Parker, and uh…. Joan Adon?
The only position that is remotely stable enough to entertain trading from a position of strength is the OF, and even there we’re making some huge assumptions about all 3 of Wood, Crews and Young’s development progressing. (However, if either of the former 2 don’t develop as planned, then basically this whole rebuild will be a bust, and nothing matters.) For that reason, Hassell is indeed expendable. You could also lump in Lile, Pinckney and de la Rosa, if they’ve got much value. But that’s it. Even Green, Vaquero and Dickerson’s development timelines (3-5 years away) are for the next Nats generation of players, and not the one that has recently graduated.
If this team has no money to spend in free agency, then I really don’t know what the medium term plan is beyond hoping Wood, Crews and House turn into the second coming of Harper, Soto and Rendon, but I’m not even sure that would be enough. Our one season with those 3 resulted in a 82-80 record.
Will
18 Dec 24 at 9:46 am
There doesn’t seem to be a plan. That’s the frustrating part. We know from past experience that Rizzo will spend with the best of ’em if he’s allowed to. So the only logical conclusion is that he isn’t being allowed to.
The Nats HAVE to sign at least one FA starting pitcher, right? Right? Even if by some miracle Cavalli is completely healthy, he’ll still be innings-limited. Considering the lack of spending on anybody right now, we should be thrilled if they can get Trevor Williams back. They also have no closer and need to sign basically half a bullpen (or more).
I would give fifty cents to never see Adon on the mound again for the Nats, and I’d double it to a dollar if you also include Rutledge.
KW
18 Dec 24 at 10:49 am
What this is starting to feel like with the Nats now is one of those LONG, no-spend, rebuild-by-tanking deals like the Trashtros and O’s undertook. The Nats accelerated their earlier rebuild by starting to spend and with some aggressive trades. I would love to see some similar acceleration now.
Also, the O’s had the considerable benefit of those infernal “competitive balance” picks that Todd mentioned in the original post. Yet another truly awful legacy from Bud Selig.
KW
18 Dec 24 at 1:12 pm
Arenado, with full no-trade contract, nixed a trade to Houston yesterday, which tells us a couple of things. One is that if Arenado is turning down a good time in a state with no income tax, he sure ain’t coming here. Another is that Houston thinks that Bregman isn’t coming back, since the Astros are trying to acquire a 3B.
Ghost at NatsTalk is really big on pursuing Bregman for his leadership intangibles. That would be nice, but his sudden 50-point drop in OBP is quite concerning, particularly for a guy who has always had bad BABIP “luck.” Interestingly, although I think of him as somewhat a creature of the Houston ballpark, his home/road career OPS split differs by only .004, so he’s the same player wherever he goes.
Bregman will be in his age-31 season, but Werth was in age-32 when he started with the Nats (and cratered in his first year). It’s really impossible to predict decline. Murphy was phenomenal at 31 and 32 but not of great value after that. Kendrick had an outstanding offensive season at 35 but had declined severely in the field.
KW
19 Dec 24 at 11:57 am
An interesting article in the Athletic https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6004284/2024/12/19/first-basemen-offensive-numbers-power/ about the big mashers aren’t first baseman. I think the Nats should take a look at short term defensive first baseman such as Goldschmidt or Santana until someone in the minors is ready to move up such as Morales.
rdExposfan
19 Dec 24 at 2:13 pm
Quick hit: we sign our 2025 version of Trevor Williams in Mike Soroka.
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2024/12/nationals-to-sign-michael-soroka.html
Todd Boss
19 Dec 24 at 5:01 pm
That’s an interesting article, although I’m not sure I agree with the author about Alonso and Walker being “all the more coveted in free agency.” That’s a line straight out of Boras’s mouth. Really, what’s their market? Who is going to give Alonso the five or six years that he wants? Maybe the Yanks, or the Mets, but the Dodgers and Phils already have guys of some note at that position.
As an alternative, the Nats (or any other team) could sign Goldy AND Santana for one year apiece for about the AAV of one year of Walker, and less than that for one year of Alonso. One could play 1B and the other DH, switch off to stay fresh, and have one take over more of the time if the other tanks. Plus no long-term commitments to a declining slugger, and no surrendering of the #46 (or higher) draft pick.
In olden days, with Alonso as a Boras client, there might have been talk of the Nats giving him a pillow contract in February with a couple of opt-outs, but I don’t think the Nats are that team anymore.
KW
19 Dec 24 at 5:10 pm
I don’t hate the gamble on Soroka (how many young arms have the Barves ruined?). His 2024 splits:
Starter: .252/.347/.509
Reliever: .189/.303/.291
Equally effective against both sides of the plate:
vs. RHB: .229/.310/.418
vs. LHB: .220/.345/.411
Interestingly, I see that his velo last year was the highest it’s ever been, a tick above where he was before injury. Maybe he was throwing harder in the shorter outings.
Now, the question is whether they paid him $9M to be a starter, or to be a closer. They obviously didn’t pay that much to get a set-up man.
KW
19 Dec 24 at 5:24 pm
The reports seem to be that he’s been promised to be tried as a starter.
Speaking of arm injuries, here’s the Athletics’s story (subscription required) on the MLB report on increasing arm problems:
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6001969/2024/12/17/mlb-report-arm-injury-epidemic/
Higher velo + higher-stress/high-spin secondary pitches = more arm problems. Not exactly Nobel-worthy findings.
KW
19 Dec 24 at 5:34 pm
The Nats have already proven they’re unwilling to pay a reliever $9m.
I don’t dislike the logic behind signing Soroka, but I only like it if we’re signing him to be our 6th SP, because the problem with Soroka has been his inability to stay healthy. If we’re banking on getting regular (good) starts from him, we’re setting ourselves up for disappointment.
But on the other hand, he has probably the most upside of any of the non premier free agents. He’s incredibly only 27 years old so you could argue he hasn’t even hit his prime yet. But I fear the arm injuries may never see him return to the player he teased in one season over 6 seasons ago.
Will
19 Dec 24 at 5:44 pm
In this pitching day and age, I don’t understand why teams are resistant to the idea of shared starts, like they do in the minors all the time. Pair Soroka and Cavalli and let each go three or four innings in the same games. The response to that suggestion usually is, “But you’d have to carry more pitchers.” Not really, though, if they can get you through 7 or 8 innings, which is a lot more than any starter is regularly giving you these days.
KW
20 Dec 24 at 9:20 am
Christian Walker at 3/$60M seems like a fair deal in the current market — and one the Nats easily could have afforded. I do wonder if, in the grand scheme of things, it’s an overpay, though, with the 1B/DH market so severely devalued in the last three years. Based on the projected prices on the FG FA tracker, you could sign Goldy ($14M) AND Santana ($7) for basically the same price, and with only a one-year commitment. (And with no draft pick penalty.)
KW
20 Dec 24 at 10:25 pm
Actually devalued for that market over the last several years, perhaps nearly a decade.
KW
20 Dec 24 at 10:27 pm
Even in this new austerity era, Rizzo has never shied away from signing washed up bats. Nelson Cruz, Joey Gallo, Kyle Schwarber (a rare example of a player who bounced back), Dominic Smith, Josh Bell and Luke Voit (albeit acquired by trade), Maikel Franco, Matt Adams, and probably more I’m forgetting.
But with the exception of Cruz and Adams, all these guys were inordinantly young, and still had considerable “bouncebackability”.
Goldschmidt is 37 and Santana will be 39. There’s no bounce back potential, it’s just a question of how much they can halt their declines. Santana’s 2024 shows that can still happen, but his 2019-2023 illustrate the flip side of that coin. Meanwhile, Goldy had an awful 2024, which isn’t surprising for his age. Could we strike gold again and flip them at the deadline like we did Candelario? Possibly, but the odds are slim, given that the 8 players listed above yielded nothing of value to the Nats. It’s not exactly a valuable strategy.
Moreover, the Nats shouldn’t be looking at one year, flip deals at this point. The chance of another DJ Herz isnt the difference between this tean being a 70 win team and a playoff team. Wood and Crews clocks are ticking. We need more wins now. Each month played in rebuild mode is a month fewer of them in playoff hunt mode. But again, I’m turning into a broken record.
Will
21 Dec 24 at 5:25 am
I’m not looking for “flipable” either. This team desperately needs power production, though. It was second-worst in homers (only two more than the woeful Chisox) and also 29th in ISO, 26th in SLG.
As much as you/we may not like the options, on the Fangraphs FA tracker, when sorted by projected WAR, the 1Bs are 1) Walker, 2) Alonso, 3) Goldy, 4) Bell, 5) Santana. Those are the choices. And Santana’s fWAR was equal to Walker’s last season and better than Alonso’s. He had 23 homers, 26 doubles, and a Gold Glove. Goldy had 22 homers and 33 doubles. Both of Goldy’s numbers would have led the Nats in those categories. Bell is younger than Walker and might be the best “bounceback” candidate, but I’d only want him as a DH. It’s defensive malpractice to allow him on the field with a glove. Goldy is a 4-time Gold Glover and presumably hasn’t completely forgotten how to play the position. Santana actually just won his only GG at age 38.
I don’t know anything about any of them in the clubhouse, but as we’ve discussed, the Nats really need some veteran presence as well.
Yeah, there’s a decent chance that at least one of these guys tanks, so sign two of them! That’s both insurance and covering 1B and DH if it works.
KW
21 Dec 24 at 9:05 am
@Will – The flipping bats didn’t net the Nats “nothing.” Schwarber got the Nats a solid prospect, but he got hurt. Reports suggest that adding Bell to the Soto trade got the Nats Susana, who may crack some top 100 prospect lists this coming year. You left out Candelario, who got the Nats a SS prospect and a guy currently in their starting rotation. Jesse Winker got the Nats a pitching prospect (Tyler Stuart) who will likely be in the AAA rotation.
I say that even though I want the Nats to move on from the “flip candidate” signs. It was a good strategy for a team in the depths of a rebuild. I’m hoping that the team starts their climb with some longer deals.
John C.
21 Dec 24 at 10:12 am
@JohnC: completely agree. we’ve absolutely turned some guys into assets. Question is … is that what we’re doign in 2025 again?
–
Todd Boss
21 Dec 24 at 10:33 am
Goldy to Yanks for 1/$12.5M. Apparently I wasn’t the only one who thought he was a half-decent option.
There weren’t a lot of teams that were even going to consider giving Alonso a fool’s gold contract, but the Yanks were thought to be one possibility. So Boras’s options shrink a bit.
KW
21 Dec 24 at 1:36 pm
Calling it now: Nats will sign Anthony Rizzo.
MG
21 Dec 24 at 1:53 pm
Now we’re REALLY talking washed up! LOL.
Info to file away for the Immaculate Grid: Rizzo has made two pitching appearances, both for the Cubs.
KW
21 Dec 24 at 3:09 pm
Starling Marte is the current active career leader in stolen bases at 354. Rickey Henderson stole more than a THOUSAND more bases (and almost 500 more than anyone else on the all-time list). He is also the all-time leader in runs scored and had 13 seasons scoring more than 100. In both JAWS and WAR he is 3d all time among left fielders, trailing only Barry Bonds and Ted Williams. Only once (at age 39) did his strikeout total exceed 100. His career K rate was 12.7%, BB rate of 16.4%. For those who didn’t see him and think he might have been a slap hitter, he actually had 297 homers, including a record 81 leading off a game.
RIP to a truly one-of-a-kind player.
(Interesting to find when looking at the stats that Trea is already #3 in stolen bases among active players, behind only Marte and Altuve.)
KW
21 Dec 24 at 8:16 pm
And Santana back to Cleveland, rendering this whole discussion moot.
MG, you’re definitely on to something with Rizzo, if only because I doubt anyone else will want to sign him.
Will
22 Dec 24 at 3:36 am
I would have been glad to get Santana or to have Naylor in trade. It is very curious when the Guardians trade Naylor after an All-Star season and sign a guy a decade older for twice as much, though.
It’s very frustrating to have the Nats just sitting on their hands. Apparently they’ll be filling out the roster again with guys the quality of Senzel.
KW
22 Dec 24 at 8:42 am
Law agrees with head-scratching: “I’m flummoxed by Cleveland giving Naylor away for so little, then turning around and spending most of the savings on a reunion with Santana, who’ll turn 39 in April and offers more downside risk than upside.”
Law on Goldy: “He’s lost a significant amount of bat speed, so he isn’t connecting with good fastballs nearly as much as he used to, and he’s putting more balls on the ground. There is still strength there for hard contact, so I can see why a team might roll the dice on a bounce-back year; I just don’t think the Yankees should be putting all of their first-base eggs in a 37-year-old basket.”
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6011903/2024/12/21/guardians-diamondbacks-trade-josh-naylor-yankees-paul-goldschmidt/
KW
22 Dec 24 at 12:37 pm
And our old buddy Luzardo traded to the Phils . . .
KW
22 Dec 24 at 12:39 pm
Well Rizzo pulled the trigger and got a first baseman Nathaniel Lowe from the Rangers for Garcia https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6013767/2024/12/22/rangers-trade-nathaniel-lowe-nationals/ Now the Nats have to look for LH reliever as well as a closer.
rdExposfan
22 Dec 24 at 8:25 pm
I’ll take Lowe, although there’s not a huge amount of power there, particularly HR power. Hopefully he’s the guy with 38 doubles in 2023, not 16 in 2024. Nice OBP, walk rate near 13%, Gold Glove in 2023, controlled for two years.
Actually sort of surprising that they could get an MLB regular for no minor leaguers whatsoever. Garcia is certainly replaceable. But speaking of which, they’ve got about two-thirds of the bullpen to replace.
What a run on first basemen over the last three days: Walker, Goldy, Naylor, Santana, and Lowe. At least the Nats got one of them.
And Boras thinks that Alonso is worth $150M+ when the Rangers and Guardians have just given away decent 1Bs for almost nothing?
KW
22 Dec 24 at 10:02 pm
2024, using bWAR:
Alonso: 2.6 WAR, .788 OPS, .329 OBP, 123 OPS+, 122 wRC+
Lowe: 2.7 WAR, .762 OPS, .361 OBP, 120 OPS+, 121 wRC+
Lowe is eight months younger and controlled for two more seasons.
KW
22 Dec 24 at 10:13 pm
It’s an interesting acquisition of Lowe. He seems to me like Josh Bell 2.0, so that’s either a compliment or insult depending how you felt about Josh Bell 1.0.
Mostly, I’m glad we could do it without trading away any prospects. Garcia was a useful piece, whose value shouldn’t be underestimated. Just look at what we got for 1.5 years of Hunter Harvey.
Perhaps most important of all Lowe seems to be a good lockerroom presence. Will he assume a leadership role? Hopefully, but remains to be seen.
But we still need a lot more work with our rotation and bullpen, as well as a DH and 3B.
Will
23 Dec 24 at 3:42 am
This trade makes me think about the Finnegan non-tender more. Rizzo (GM not 1B!) has now seemingly “won” trades of relievers with Harvey and Garcia. Reasonable to assume that the rest of the league just doesn’t think Finnegan has much value. We’ll see what he ultimately signs for, but more evidence that Rizzo probably didn’t just “botch” that situation.
MG
23 Dec 24 at 6:52 am
this is a very good pickup but don’t for a minute think we didn’t have to give up something. Garcia is controllable for five years at a time he seems to be coming on.
Wallace and Lomavita while just what the organization needs right now could easily turn into Kieboom and Read
FredMD
23 Dec 24 at 7:59 am
The Nats seem to have gotten the peak year and half of Bell’s career, so if that’s what you’re comping with Lowe, I’ll take it. There’s no comp in the field, where Lowe has a Gold Glove and Bell had hands of stone.
Lowe’s two year of control also are a good bridge for them to find out if Morales or House is the 1B of the future. If Morales in particular doesn’t make much progress in 2025, they could talk about extending Lowe for a couple of seasons when it’s tender time next fall.
Bell struggled so much last season that I wonder whether he’ll even get an MLB contract.
FredMD, I personally have no issue with trading prospects, provided you get high-level return for them. I’ve gotten fussed at here for suggesting that certain guys shouldn’t be considered untouchable. There’s high risk/high reward for such deals. Just think back to when teams were supposedly asking for Robles or Soto in trade return. Looking back now, we would consider one made for Robles a great deal, but one made for Soto a colossal disaster. Yet Robles was more highly rated as a prospect.
KW
23 Dec 24 at 8:50 am
who you give up and who you get has to fit the plan. we see one move at a time while MLB operators see multiple moves ahead. giving away prospects right now does not seem to be Rizzo’s plan. some may be getting impatient but I am not.
FredMD
23 Dec 24 at 9:55 am
Interesting note: it’s not clear how many years of team control Garcia has remaining. B-R has Garcia with five years of team control (FA after 2029) while Fangraphs has him with four (FA after 2028).
I make the trade either way, though. Garcia has promise, but he’s kind of the “anti-(good) Finnegan.” Good Kyle had good results on mediocre-to-bad peripherals. Garcia has OK-not-great results (3-6 record, 4.22 ERA) with good peripherals (2.38 FIP; 1.109 WHIP). And if I can get a solid regular player for a not-elite bullpen arm? Yes, please. I wonder if the Rangers went for a current major leaguer instead of prospects is because they are in “win-now” mode. Bochy isn’t getting any younger.
John C.
23 Dec 24 at 11:02 am
FredMD, you just said above that even some highly valued prospects like Kieboom, and decently valued like Read, can turn out to be duds. In retrospect, wouldn’t you have liked to see them traded for something while they had value? I’m not at all in favor of “giving away prospects,” but neither do I like to see them wither on the vine while we cling too tightly too them. In particular, Rizzo seems to like to hang onto his first-round picks, convinced that he’ll ultimately be right about them.
To be clear, I’m not talking about giving guys away. I’m talking about dealing them for everyday players of good quality. The Nats have quite a large number of decent-to-better prospects right now, not nearly all of whom they’ll have places for in the majors. All in all, the system is probably the deepest that I can remember. Just make sound internal evaluations on who you deal and who you don’t. Rizzo more often than not has been at his best in making these types of deals.
KW
23 Dec 24 at 1:27 pm
by the time they begin to whither they have little value, hanging on to them beats dumping them for nothing.
look what we had to give up to get Adam Eaton, a solid everyday player to be sure. Giolito, Dunning and Lopez were all highly rated prospects, not decent-to-better.
FredMD
23 Dec 24 at 8:54 pm
I’m not sure my answer provided much clarity. what I feel is that the plan last time was to win right away. I feel like the plan this time is to develop the minor league system to where it provides more solid everyday players. when you’re a player or two away, then you can deal from strength in numbers.
they’re not quite there yet, on either goal. but they’re close.
FredMD
24 Dec 24 at 8:15 am
The Nats mostly rebuilt internally in 2011-12 but did make the Werth signing in 2011 and the big Gio deal before 2012 with four prospects. Still, they had guys like Lombo and Tyler Moore playing significant innings. Then they traded a major prospect for Span and signed LaRoche. The season after that, they traded three guys for Doug Fister, the significant prospect being Robbie Ray. (The story goes that the Nats pushed for them to take Ray over the legendary Taylor Jordan. Oops. That’s why internal evaluation is important.) The better they got, the more they traded from their prospect stock, while at the same time having a pretty awful draft track record, as we’ve discussed. So they didn’t replenish the system.
The trade for Adam Eaton was to have someone available to more or less replace Harper if/when he left. Eaton had a 6.6 WAR season before the trade and was controlled for three more years, so he cost a pretty penny. He also hit .320 in the World Series and drove in six runs, so you’ll never get me to lament that trade.
It is instructive to note that Rizzo traded a top-50 prospect in Meyer and a top-15 one in Giolito, so he truly will trade anyone if the deal is right. He also traded a guy in Souza who would have a 30-homer season (for a guy who will get Hall of Fame votes).
Again, I’m not at all advocating that they back up the truck. But at the same time, they’re not going to become a contender just from their current prospects. They’re going to have to sign free agents and make trades. And considering that they don’t seem to be willing to spent much on free agents, I would say that more significant trades are coming over the next couple of years.
Not that I’m jumping up and down that they overpay for free agents, either. Bregman seems to have priced himself out of a return to Houston, and 20% of teams just got new 1Bs for a ton less than Alonso wants. I have no interest in those guys at those prices.
KW
24 Dec 24 at 2:26 pm
free agent signings and potentially more trades will be needed, on that there’s no dispute.
Happy Holidays to all!
FredMD
25 Dec 24 at 8:19 am
I always interpreted the Werth signing as a signal to the league and agents that, after years of not spending and being accused of being cheapskates, that the new ownership would indeed spend money if the situation presented itself. It’s relatively easy to judge the Werth years here as a failure: 7yrs, $126M, 9 total bWAR, 1 (known) DWI arrest. But we signed on for a slugger’s age 32-38 seasons and he did have two 4+ win seasons for us. And his impact on the clubhouse was pretty clear. During his 7 seasons here the team made the playoffs four times and he was the team’s best player in the fateful 2013 season where the team should ahve been a heck of a lot better than they were.
But, that being said this team will need more than a Jayson Werth contract to supplant NY, Philly, and Atlanta in this division. They’re going to need offense. Believe it or not last year’s pitching staff was really not that bad (starters top 10 in the league in fWAR, fip and relievers #11 in fWAR and top half in FIP. Now, could we use an ace to move that number from top 10 to top 5? you bet. But the focus needs to be on the bats. 24th in fWAR, 24th in wRC+, 24th in wOBA. We either need these prospects to turn into Bobby Witt Jr. level stars, or we need to buy some offense.
Todd Boss
25 Dec 24 at 11:40 am
Happy holidays to Todd and the NAR band!
What the team really needs is better defense. The pitching staff was good in FIP (which is what FG looks at, which is why they rated to much better by fWAR than bWAR). The Nats were #29 in MLB in Defensive Efficiency, better on than the Rockies (who are handicapped by Coors Field). It was especially bad for the LHP on the staff. This is likely because the left side of the field (RH pull side) was turrible. Abrams and whoever was at 3b that day (Lipscomb/Senzel/Tena) were not good, and James Wood struggled in LF. Pity the pitchers.
They NEED to be better on defense. Lowe should help, as should having Crews in RF for a full season. Hopefully Wood improves with time (he was highly rated defensively as a prospect). Abrams was really bad last year, so hopefully there’s no where to go but up for him. He’s in danger of playing himself out of the SS position.
John C.
25 Dec 24 at 2:31 pm
Happy holidays to all!
People forget what a damn good ballplayer Werth was, and he was coming off a career year in 2010. At some point this offseason I looked back at Werth’s stats that season thinking that I could do a comparison with guys like Alonso and Bregman, but it wasn’t even close — Werth was significantly better: .296/.388/.532, 144 OPS+, league-leading 46 doubles, and 27 homers. So the Nats were paying for star-level talent, and paying above market value to get him to come to what to that point had been a turkey of a franchise. They were also paying for “culture change,” which they got. It was in the form of a somewhat quirky dude to be sure, but he definitely brought a winner’s attitude.
Werth aged and regressed normally, struggled mightily his first two seasons in DC, had two very strong seasons in 2013 and 2014, then got old. That’s what happens when you pay for years above age 35. It’s gonna happen.
Anyone remember the other player in the 2010-11 offseason who was Werth’s competition for a premium contract? Fifty cents to whoever remembers Carl Crawford. He got an even larger contract than Werth but aged so poorly that the Dodgers ate $43 million for him to go away his last two years. He was toast at 34. Werth played to 9.0 bWAR in his contract, while Crawford produced only 3.6, for 7/$142M.
(Quick look, out of morbid curiosity: Rendon has produced 3.7 bWAR over five years with the Angels, and he’s still owed $67M guaranteed.)
KW
25 Dec 24 at 7:31 pm
Definitely agree with John C. on the need to improve the defense. It helps everything, but particularly the mentality of the young pitchers.
And don’t think Rizzo won’t make a drastic defense-improving move involving a young star (Abrams). They decided quickly that Harper shouldn’t be playing CF, so they traded a very good prospect for Span, bumped Bryce to LF, and got what they could for the suddenly expendable Mikey Morse. A similar scenario now would be to trade for a SS, move Abrams to 2B, and get what they could for Garcia. Or for now they could try Abrams at 3B.
(You could have an interesting debate on the relative futures of Abrams and Garcia, if Abrams get his head screwed on straight [something Garcia also had to do]. My eye-test sense is that Garcia is close to maxing out his ceiling while Abrams isn’t.)
This is not to deny Todd’s point that they also desperately need to hit better. He noted the overall hitting production deficit, but missing power is a key component of that: 29th in the majors in homers and ISO, 26th in SLG. They had a paltry 135 homers and from that have lost Winker (11), Gallo (10), Rosario (7), and Senzel (7), among others. Of those, only Winker was any good, but my point is that the returning players produced less than 100 big flies. Obviously they hope that full seasons of Wood and Crews will help those numbers, but there will be a learning curve for both.
KW
25 Dec 24 at 8:02 pm