Nationals Arm Race

"… the reason you win or lose is darn near always the same – pitching.” — Earl Weaver

June Draft Content review and Final 1-1 candidate stat check-in

30 comments

Like Crews before him, Anderson finishes off his college career with a title before getting picked by the Nats in the 1st. Maybe. Photo via MLB.com

Here’s our ninth check-in on the 1-1 candidates this spring. There’s not a ton of stat updating, since we’re down to the CWS with just a couple of 1-1 candidates active in Omaha, so this is mostly about discussing draft content as it has been released lately.

We’re still a few weeks away from the draft, which occurs in mid July at the All Star Game. Amazing to think we used to have this draft basically during the college playoffs. However, as you can see from some of the more recent mocks, we’re definitely starting to see some repeating predictions at the top.

Important Draft related news and notes, plus Mocks and Draft rankings that have published since our last posting, are listed below:

  • Baseball America released its v4.0 Mock Draft on 6/9/25: they go Holliday, Anderson, Arquette, Doyle, Willits. In the text they say the following: “Holliday, Willits and then Oregon State shortstop Aiva Arquette would be my favorites [to be picked by the Nationals], in that order.”
  • Baseball Prospect Journal is kind of a new shop that i’ve found recently; they’ve done a couple mocks already. Here’s their latest dated 6/9/25: Holliday, Anderson, Arquette, Arnold, Willits. Very similar to BA’s above.
  • Keith Law released his latest v2.0 Mock Draft on 6/12/25 with a surprise at top: Arquette, Doyle, Anderson, Holliday, Willits
  • MLBPipeline’s Jim Callis released his latest Mock on 6/12/25. Holliday, Anderson, Arnold, Hernandez, Carlson (?). He seems to think the Nats are down to either Holliday or Anderson.
  • Baseball America released a list of the 322 players signed up for the MLB Draft Combine, being held June 17-21 in Phoenix. Notable 1-1 candidates attending: Arnold, Doyle, Hernandez. Notable 1-1 candidates who are NOT going to attend? Holliday, Anderson, Arquette, Willits. Interesting. I wonder if its a gambit by Holliday in particular to not show up in order to prevent any team shenanigans from happening.
  • ESPN’s Kiley McDaniel released his v2.0 mock draft on 6/17/25: he goes Anderson, Doyle, Arnold, Holliday, then a huge shocker in JoJo Parker at #5, a player i’ve not even heard of throughout this entire process. Remember, McDaniel’s model highly overvalues “Future Value” or FV, and prep kids look a ton better in his ranks than college kids.
  • MLBPipeline’s Callis with his 6/19/25 mock: Holliday, Anderson, Arquette, Arnold, and Willits. In the last week he’s dropped both Hernandez and Carlson in favor of Arnold and Willits.
  • USA Today did a consolidated Mock by averaging the draft positions of a bunch of other pundits (most of whom are linked above) and came up with Holliday, Doyle, Arquette, Anderson, Arnold
  • BA released its “Draft Intel” notes article on 6/23/25, with a couple of nuggets on top candidates.
  • Baseball Prospect Journal released its v3.0 Mock Draft on 6/24/25. They go Anderson, Arnold, Arquette, Holliday, Willits. Clearly, if Holiday doesn’t got #1 overall, he isn’t getting by Colorado at #4 with the family connection.
  • Callis & Mayo did a back-and-forth mock on their MLBPipeline podcast on 6/24/25: Holliday, Anderson, Arquette, Arnold, Willits.

Draft Boards (not mocks): these are major shops Prospect Ranking lists, usually with Scouting reports, video, tool grades, etc.

Link Block for the top guys under 1-1 consideration

Prep Players who are in the running for 1-1:

Here’s some updated commentary on the players seemingly in the running; all four had significant post season stats to discuss:

  • Anderson threw the first game of the CWS against Arkansas and was glittering: 7ip 3 hits, 1r (on an inside FB that Arkansas’ light-hitting 1B turned on), 7/2 K/BB. Just 100 pitches to get through 7. If this was his last performance for scouts, he couldn’t have asked for much more. Then, when LSU made the final, Anderson got the ball on regular rest and threw what was both amazing and concerning: complete game 1-0 shutout, 3hitter. 10k/5bb … and 130 pitches. 130. He was north of 100 heading into the 8th but stayed in to the end. We discussed this in the comments already; will this make a difference in the Nats decision making? It will be curious to see how the pundits/mock drafters react, if at all. Season complete.
  • Arquette went 5-14 with a huge 9th inning homer in his final collegiate game in three CWS games. His only RBI was his solo shot, but he certainly finished on a high note. Season Complete.
  • Doyle Season Complete
  • Arnold: Season complete.

Prep kids:

  • Holliday: season complete.
  • Hernandez: season complete.
  • Willits: season complete.

My current prediction for the top 5: Despite pundits claiming the nats are considering basically 7-8 guys, I think its going to be either Anderson or Holliday.

If we pick Holliday, the top 5 prediction is:

  • Holliday, Anderson, Arquette, Arnold, Willits.

If however, the Nats go Anderson, then I think the draft goes like this:

  • Anderson, Doyle, Arquette, Holliday (lock here if he doesn’t go 1-1), Arnold

I’m repeating this analysis from before on the teams in the top 5 and their proclivities with their 1st rounders, but i’ve added to it a bit as it helps guide the predictions:

  1. Washington: likes “famous” guys and isn’t afraid to roll with Boras clients: this is the argument for Holliday. But, they love taking big body college arms with their first picks (a moniker that describes most of the 1st rounders in the Rizzo era), which screams either Anderson or Doyle. The post season performances of all three college arms re-configured where they stand; going into the playoffs it probably want Arnold-Doyle-Anderson. Coming out of the post-season, it’s Anderson-Arnold-Doyle. I believe Anderson has separated himself from the pack and is now a worthy 1-1 pick. We’d still get a haircut on him, which helps us later on.
  2. Angels: want quick to the majors college guys; they hyper promote and have had a draftee be first to debut for each draft class for 3 years running. Their last six 1st rounders have all been college players. This screams polished college arm, and Doyle seems closest to the majors. Like, Doyle could be in their bullpen in September. If Anderson is available they take him, otherwise Doyle.
  3. Seattle loves prep kids at the top; 5 of last 6 picks have been HSers, all bats, no prep arms. However, none of the analysts have them on a prep kid this year. Everyone has them on Arquette. It’s entirely possible they’re looking at the prep SS (Holliday, Willits, even Carson) and saying, “Arquette is 2yrs older and a ton better).
  4. Colorado can’t get FA pitchers to come to Denver, so they have to grow them. Their last six 1st rounders have all been college, and 3 of the last 4 are arms. I think they pick Arnold or Doyle, whoever’s there (likely Arnold). That being said, if Holliday is available, this is his likely floor due to the family connection in Colorado. So, its either Holliday or whatever arm is left.
  5. St. Louis has 4 straight college guys in 1st; I think they end up with whoever from Arquette, Arnold, Doyle, or Anderson is available here. However, they (like the industry) seems to have soured on Doyle, so many have them plucking the next-best prep SS in Willits.

Written by Todd Boss

June 25th, 2025 at 9:16 am

Posted in Draft

«
»

30 Responses to 'June Draft Content review and Final 1-1 candidate stat check-in'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'June Draft Content review and Final 1-1 candidate stat check-in'.

  1. I think my priority if I were running the draft would be:

    1) I want a guy who I can see in the rotation in 2027.
    2) I want a great hitter.

    Holliday looks to be a good answer to #2, but given how bad the system’s pitching depth is, I think #1 is more important.

    Kevin R

    25 Jun 25 at 2:16 pm

  2. For whatever it’s worth, Jackson Holliday’s agent is . . . Boras. It figures that lil’ bro will keep it in the family. Among the recent LSU studs, Crews went with Boras, but Skenes chose ISE Baseball, so it’s not a lock that Anderson will be with Boras. (As an aside, if players can get NIL money, why do they have to wait to officially have agents?)

    I get the love for Anderson, Holliday, Arnold, Doyle, Arquette, and even Hernandez (although the risk level on him seems to be driving him out of top-five projections). The one I don’t get is Willits. He’s a good contact/no power infielder, with very limited future power projection. I’m sorry, but if that’s your profile, you have to have something extra, like the 70-80 grade speed that Trea and CJ had. (Both of them subsequently developed pretty decent power.) If you want a hitter, I would take Holliday or Arquette 10 times out of 10 before I’d take Willits. He seems like wishful thinking to me.

    Doyle seems to be sliding on some boards. I would think that the Angels will be on either Anderson or Arnold.

    KW

    25 Jun 25 at 4:35 pm

  3. Speaking of Boras, I think there’s some significant value in avoiding drafting his clients. 99.9% of the time Boras’ players will avoid signing and extension, and these extensions are one of the most efficient ways to secure cost-efficient talent. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that most of the Nats’ top talents (Harper, Strasburg, Soto, Rendon, and now Gore, Wood and Crews) have been Boras clients and that we’ve been incapable of signing any of our top talents to extensions.

    The Braves have seemingly intentionally take this approach (https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5274293/2024/02/14/scott-boras-braves-dodgers-free-agents/), and it had been paying dividends, allowing them to make some absurdly team friendly deals to Albies, Acuna, Harris and Strider. Something to consider…

    On Willits, I totally agree. I cannot understand the infatuation with him. If he develops in the best case as predicted, it sounds like he’d be David Eckstein: a SS with non-elite defense, a good AVG, but otherwise pretty empty bat (or to use a more contemporary example: Jose Igelsias). MLB Pipeline put together a tool-based rating. This is Willits:

    Scouting grades: Hit: 60 | Power: 45 | Run: 60 | Arm: 55 | Field: 55 | Overall: 60

    For one, it’s really weird that his overall score is rated higher than his individual tools. Usually it’s rounded down (or somewhat of an average), further suggesting undeserved hype.

    But if you dig deeper, there doesn’t seem to be any good reason how this profile turns into a “60” in comparison to other players of a similar profile. Compare him to other HS SS way, way down their draft list.

    This is the report they put together for Josh Owens, a HS pick I’d never heard of before, who MLB rank 89th:

    Scouting grades: Hit: 50 | Power: 45 | Run: 70 | Arm: 60 | Field: 50 | Overall: 45

    Or Aiden West a HS SS out of MD ranked 123rd:
    Scouting grades: Hit: 50 | Power: 50 | Run: 55 | Arm: 50 | Field: 45 | Overall: 45

    It makes no sense to me, and I’d avoid Willits like the plague. He profiles like a guy you could get in the 4th or 5th round, but just has unjustified hype (because his dad was a big leaguer and still a coach??)

    Will

    26 Jun 25 at 5:52 am

  4. Boras clients comment: Honestly, if you’re skipping Boras clients because you’re worried about something that MAY happen 10 years from now (3-4 years in minors, then 6 years in majors, and that’s in the absolute best case for a player getting drafted and not getting hurt, producing, and maximizing their potential future value grades … no small feats any of them) … man that’s just a bad approach. Boras represents so much top talent that specifically ignoring his clients seems folly. The Braves got incredibly lucky that a couple of their stars signed absolutely stupidly pro-team deals, which has allowed them to build their team for the last few years … but even that has pitfalls (they’re 37-42 right now and in serious trouble)

    Yes Boras clients tend to test FA. As long as the Lerners own this team, it doesn’t frigging matter if its a boras client or some other agent; they’re not going to “set the market” in a way that Harper and Soto did. It just won’t happen. We just don’t have the financial resources of a top 5 market team (NY, LA, Chi, Bos, Phi). We’ve now managed to entirely miss the RSN era having earned a fraction of what we should have thanks to MLB capitulating to a litigious asshole in Baltimore, and I’m not entirely sure how the team gets back there unless they can run another decade-long string of winning seasons.

    Willits comment: totally agree; i see a power-less middle infielder in an era where you have 6’3″ power-hitting SS on nearly every team.

    Todd Boss

    26 Jun 25 at 10:02 am

  5. So, if the Nats swore off Boras clients, the Nats would have nixed including James Wood in the Soto deal…. Hmmm… Doesn’t seem like the best approach.

    Not advocating taking Willits 1-1, but he reclassified and is only 17. At that age, he is 6-1 180. He will get bigger and stronger that is essentially guaranteed. Power is always the last tool to develop. He will never have Holliday’s (6-4 210) power, but not beyond the realm that with his bat to ball skills that Willits could develop above average power.

    Pilchard

    26 Jun 25 at 3:04 pm

  6. I’m not anti-Boras. In fact, I’d say that the Nats have benefited considerably from playing ball with him when others wouldn’t. That said, there are situations to be wary of him and this is one: assuming that E. Holliday is his client, he’s going to want at least $10 to 10.5M for him, when nearly any of the collegians can be had for around $8.5M. Is Holliday really THAT much better than any of the college guys available, all the more when you factor in the swing/miss issues that likely will slow his progress by a year or two?

    On the flip side, here’s Law’s take on six in the draft with a chance to be in the majors within a year:

    https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6451010/2025/06/26/mlb-draft-prospects-minors-major-league/

    For those without a subscription, the six are Doyle, Anderson, Arnold, Gage Wood, Chase Shores, and Ike Irish. Irish is sort of a draft crush of mine, but I was surprised to see him listed ahead of/instead of Arquette. The caveat on all of this is that part of the quick-to-the-majors projections on some of these would be to bring them up as relievers first, which the Nats rarely have done with legit potential starters during the Rizzo era.

    For whatever it’s worth, Law remains quite bullish on Doyle, while others are quietly sliding him down their boards.

    Re Willits, it’s not Will and me saying he is unlikely to develop power, it’s what the gurus are saying. Incidentally, on the MLB.com board, there are 7 high school shortstops among their top 14 players. Egad.

    Speaking of these creatures, Todd expressed unfamiliarity with JoJo Parker. JoJo has a twin in the draft, and brother Jacob (who has more power and more swing/miss) likely will be a target in the 2d or 3d round for teams that have slot-saved in earlier rounds. There’s a gaping difference of opinion on Jacob, who Law has at #56 but is only #109 on the MLB.com board.

    Law on Jacob Parker: “Parker’s twin brother, JoJo, is a first-rounder, but I wouldn’t sleep on Jacob, who is bigger and stronger, with much more present power, but more swing and miss to his game. He’s a center fielder and a strong athlete but I’d bet he ends up in right field in the long term. His BP is very impressive, with at least 60 raw power now, and he is about as sculpted as Michelangelo’s David.”

    There ya go, the trait Rizzo values most: he looks great in a uniform!

    KW

    26 Jun 25 at 4:08 pm

  7. Realize this sounds crazy, but the Nats have leverage over Boras in negotiating Holliday’s 1-1 draft bonus. The slot value for the 1-1 (the Nats’ pick) is $11.075; 1-2 (Angels) $10.2; 1-3 $9.5 (Mariners); 1-4 $8.7 (Rockies).

    Lots of disinformation going around right now, but the current consensus opinion is that if the Nats pass on Holliday, he likely slips to the Rockies (Angels don’t take HS guys; the Mariners have been linked to Arquette). If Holliday is available, Colorado will take their legacy at #4. Boras knows this.

    So, the negotiations between the Nats and whomever they are considering have started. If Boras holds to Holliday getting no less than $10.5, and the Nats pass, Boras is costing his client money. So, what is it worth to Holliday to be the 1-1 like his brother? Hard to be certain, but guessing its a number less than $10.5, but more than $8.7 the Rockies will pay.

    Pilchard

    26 Jun 25 at 5:39 pm

  8. Not draft related, but Sykora is now getting promoted to AA. After his dominance in low-A last year, I expected him to dominate A+, though I wouldn’t have predicted his amazing numbers to get even better (perhaps the home park at Wilmington had some effect here?). Double-A will be a real test for him, however, and how he performs between now and the end of the season will provide a lot of information. I think if he puts up a < 2.00 FIP in AA, we'll be hearing about how he's the best pitching prospect in baseball and how he could break camp with the big league club next year. If it's < 3.00, he'll be a top-25 prospect and maybe even top-ten. A FIP between 3.00 and 4.00 with his age, pedigree, and existing performance would take away some helium but he would still be a top-100 guy. I'm very interested to see what happens. Pitchers who dominate to the level Sykora has tend to keep dominating…

    Re draft: I don't have a strong view and am just not competent to make predictions about whether a pitcher's delivery will hold up; I like Doyle because I like K%; I would avoid Holliday for the reasons KW has articulated and Hernandez doesn't seem to be good enough to overcome a presumption against taking a HS pitcher at the top of the draft; I wouldn't be upset with Anderson.

    Derk

    26 Jun 25 at 6:59 pm

  9. @Pilchard — I’ll buy at least some of that argument. The consensus does indeed seem to be that Holliday would slip to the Rockies if the Nats pass on him. However, we’re talking Boras here, so he’s sure not going to take the #4 slot value at 1/1. He’s still going to want at least $9.5M and likely would start off asking for even more.

    Of course I don’t particularly want Holliday. I don’t hate him and don’t think he’s going to flop, but his MLB ETA would be about 2029 as a full-time regular. That isn’t what this franchise needs right now. Is he the “best player available”? Maybe, but a) if so it’s not by much, and b) there’s significantly more risk with him than there is any of the collegians, which could outweigh the slight BPA factor in teams’ minds.

    I do think I would have Holliday ahead of Arnold, who, while having a very high floor, seems close to maxed out. Arquette seems pretty comparable to Holliday and a much more refined hitter. It’s fair is people want to question his ceiling, though. Doyle has the most active fastball in the draft but also needs some refinement. And then there’s Anderson, who already has four solid pitches but also a lot of room (and younger age) for much more physical projection. (I completely agree with Law that Anderson should be shut down for the rest of this summer.)

    KW

    26 Jun 25 at 7:33 pm

  10. On Boras, I don’t think there should be a hard never-do-business-with-Boras-clients rule, just an added factor when evaluating players. Because there is a comparative advantage to be gained from signing a player early on to a very team-friendly contract, which Boras 99.9% of the time refuses to entertain.

    Throwing a crazier idea out there: what about simply not signing our 1-1 pick, and taking 1-2 as compensation next year as a draft strategy? Next year’s class is already looking much stronger than this year’s. Drew Burress a Soph at GT and Roch Cholowsky a Soph at UCLA might already be better than every draft eligible college bat this year. That would be a pretty bold strategy. And I admit it wouldn’t be wise for the Nats in their current state of rebuild. However, waiting a year then taking a polished college bat like Burress in 2026 would still likely see Burress in the majors sooner than Holliday. Something to think about…

    On Willits, yes, he’s young. But his age is already baked into the scouting reports. Scouting reports aren’t based on present day ability, but future projections. So the brains that gave him a 45 (average/slightly above average) grade for power, gave that to him for the future, not that he’s – at 17 – good for average major league power. Otherwise, no HS pick would ever have good scouting grades. Willits floor looks surprisingly high for a toolsy 17 year old, but his ceiling looks exceptionally low too. Exhibit Q that this draft is weird: one of the higher rated HS picks is actually one of the “safer” picks.

    On Sykora, I don’t remember if it was here or on NatsProspects, but I posted about how I believe he’s in the mix to be the top pitching prospect in baseball this winter. MLB Pipeline already rates him 9th best. Chase Burns and Bubba Chandler are, in my opinion, better than Sykora, but Burns just got promoted, and will likely loose rookie eligibility before the end of the season. And Chandler has looked really bad over the past month (10.61 ERA over his last 4 starts and command issues). That has all the hallmarks of an impending injury. And if that were to happen, it creates a clear path for Sykora.

    There’s other guys firmly in the mix, like Andrew Painter and Noah Schultz, but I don’t know how you can look at their performance, injury history, age, pitch mix and command and come away with the conclusion they’re better/safer prospects than Sykora.

    Will

    27 Jun 25 at 9:30 am

  11. @Pilchard: I agree with your logic on Holliday. Holliday absolutely slides to #4 if he doesn’t go 1-1, and I’ll bet dollars to donuts the Nats know this and are basically saying to Holliday take it or leave it on an amount that’s slightly higher than 1-4 but which doesn’t come anywhere near 1-1. Maybe Boras says “fine FU we’ll go play in Colorado” where a power slugger might hit 60. Maybe not.

    This might be the best evidence yet that Anderson goes 1-1.

    Todd Boss

    27 Jun 25 at 11:42 am

  12. @Will: on purposely blowing 1-1 so you get 1-2 next year … I’ve seen this come up in the past during weaker drafts and there’s just not a solid argument to support it. maybe if we were a 105 loss team that gambit might work, but as you know, there’s just no sure things in the draft. Was anyone looking at Arnold or Doyle or Anderson at 1-1 a year ago? No way. Those guys grew into that slot, just like the guy who we all thought was 1-1 last fall (LaViolette) fell off a cliff.

    On Sykora to AA, two thoughts: 1st: finally. 2nd: Harrisburg’s rotation is looking pretty scary for opponents: 40-man Lara, solid prospect in Stuart, pitching out of his mind Cornelio, possibly top pitching prospect in the sport Sykora, and then 3 guys who all have AAA time to shake out for the 5th spot. And that’s AFTER they lost Susana. Phew. I’m definitely getting tickets when they come to Richmond (man, i hope they still have a Richmond trip)

    Todd Boss

    27 Jun 25 at 11:49 am

  13. But Will is proposing possibly punting on 1-1 this year precisely because these guys that “grew into that slot” all look kind of meh.

    That’s not the case every year, and it’s not exactly rare for the top picks to hold their position over their draft year.

    Though who’s to say about next year specifically. I do agree there’s a lot of extra variance scouting another year out – and that’s on top of how nearly impossible it is to scout amateurs in the first place.

    Honestly, I could see the tradeoff being worth it if the downside was just the time-value-of-money stuff with the lost year of development etc. But for a GM to go that route, they’d need to be 100% rock solid on their job, because the national sports media would completely lambast you as incompetent and I’m pretty sure you’d have to pretend that it wasn’t your plan to avoid a CBA issue.

    The strategic gain would have to be crystal clear for it to make practical sense, and I’m not sure there’s been a draft this century where you can so reliably count on the 1-2 pick. Maybe 2023, with Skenes and Crews, but that was a very special draft year downstream of Covid.

    SMS

    27 Jun 25 at 12:18 pm

  14. @SMS: i failed to write the flip side of the argument; what looks great now, in June of 2025, could look just as bad or worse in July 2026. Guys get hurt, they underperform, they disappear. What if we try this gambit, purposely punt on the one guy in our draft who is most likely to make the majors … that sets the player development train back a significant amoutn for the next year. If we were 110loss territory maybe, but this team has the components to get good, fast. This isn’t what successfull (or any) organizations do.

    Todd Boss

    27 Jun 25 at 12:35 pm

  15. To me, mostly for the reasons that Todd gives, the “punt the #1/#1 pick in favor of the #2 pick next year” strategy is the kind of thing that works well on a theoretical internet thread or in a college dorm room at 3 AM but doesn’t work well in real life. I’ll just add this to Todd’s reasons: it would blow up the Nats’ draft pool money for this season, in a year where while the top of the draft is a jumbled mess the depth of the draft is regarded in most places that I’ve seen as actually pretty solid.

    It was leveraging underslot money to buy a prospect out of a college commitment that landed the Nats Sykora. This draft may provide similar opportunities.

    John C.

    27 Jun 25 at 2:00 pm

  16. On “punting” 1-1, it worked incredibly well the one time it actually happened in reality. The Astros drafted Brady Aiken, neglected to sign him due to injury concerns, then turned the 1-2 pick into Alex Bregman the following year. Aiken never played a game in the majors, while Bregman led them to a WS title and over 40 WAR.

    That isn’t to say it will work out the same way. And there’s definitely the risk of losing the slot value, which would torpedo the potential of overslot signings later in the draft. But this year’s high-end draft class is probably the weakest one in years, so it could be the year to risk it.

    SMS, you’re definitely right that it’s an extremely risky choice, and a GM would want to be sure about their job security. But 1) I would question whether Rizzo is feeling any heat. There doesn’t appear to be any accountability within this organization, and Rizzo is currently the 3rd longest tenured GM in baseball. If he wasn’t fired after putting up the 2nd worst winning percentage over the past half decade, then why would he now? 2) Assuming he is under pressure, perhaps throwing up a hail mary like this, might actually be what’s needed from a GM under pressure to show he’s trying new stuff. Clearly, the steady course isn’t yielding the intended results, so bold action like this might be a way to show his bosses he’s mixing things up.

    I’m not even sure if I’m convinced this is a good idea, and I definitely don’t think this is something the Nats will do. But I would definitely fall towards scenario 2 above, and at least give Rizzo credit for an old dog learning new tricks.

    Let’s come back to this in a year and see if we’d prefer 2026’s 1-2 over whoever we take at 1-1.

    Will

    27 Jun 25 at 3:29 pm

  17. Apart from the baseball consequences, punting on the draft pick would be wildly unethical. I mean some kid with a reasonable shot at a baseball career and a big payday would get totally screwed by being drafted by a team with no interest in actually making a deal.

    Matt

    27 Jun 25 at 3:34 pm

  18. @ Matt — Amen. It would be terrible for the kid who was drafted.

    It also would make agents extremely wary of dealing with you, not just for draft picks, but for free agents.

    KW

    27 Jun 25 at 4:22 pm

  19. And John C. is right about blowing up the draft pool money. I’m much more interested in the Nats making an above-slot deal with a high schooler in the 2d or 3d round than I am at 1/1. Good recent track record with Dickerson and Sykora. Bumpier road a little farther past with Cox and Infante. It hurts a lot less to miss on a guy in a lower round than it does high in the 1st, though. (Nats Nation turns its lonely eyes to you, Elijah Green.)

    KW

    27 Jun 25 at 4:29 pm

  20. Also, I want a college player. I want help sooner rather than later. This is a team that’s 4-16 in it’s last 20 games. Don’t talk to me about some kid who might become a regular in 2029. Rizzo and Davey may have retired (or been “retired”) by then. Gore (2028) and Abrams (2029) will be free agents, and the Nats will already be trying to figure out how they’ll give Wood an $800M contract in 2031.

    KW

    27 Jun 25 at 6:25 pm

  21. On Houston “punting” a pick … FWIW, I don’t think you can claim that Houston purposely blew the Aiken pick. That’s not how that went down at all. Did they “luck out” by getting Bregman the next year? Absolutely. Would they have made multiple deep playoff runs without Bregman? Probably not.

    This is a post from Mar 2015 that talks about it the moment that Aiken blew out his arm: https://www.nationalsarmrace.com/?p=10370

    quoting myself: Quick oral history of the Aiken situation: Houston made him last year’s #1 overall pick, then rescinded/altered their $6.5M bonus offer after having “concerns” about Aiken’s UCL when viewing his medicals.  Aiken’s representatives rejected the lowered offer (wanting Houston to honor their original offer), and in the end declined to sign the lower amount (reportedly $5M at the deadline), and Aiken became just the third #1 overall pick to fail to sign in the draft’s history.  Thanks to baseball’s convoluted draft bonus rules, the failure to sign Aiken led to a cascading effect, costing them enough “pool dollars” to have to also rescind offers to 5th round pick Jacob Nix and 21st round pick Mac Marshall (now at LSU).  Nix (rightly so) filed a grievance against the Astros for the situation and was awarded his full $1.5M promised bonus (which, in my opinion, should absolutely be coming out of the Astros’ bonus pool for what they did).  Nix and Aiken eventually enrolled at the IMG academy in Florida, a post-graduate prep school designed to be a place for budding athletes to play who may have lost their HS eligibility.  Both had planned on re-entering the 2015 draft.

    They lost THREE players when they decided not to sign Aiken, and basically the moment Aiken took the mound the next spring he blew the UCL and had TJ.

    Todd Boss

    28 Jun 25 at 9:55 am

  22. You don’t draft for need in Baseball. This isn’t the NBA, where rookies go right into the starting lineup and there’s only one shooting guard on the floor at a time. Bryce Harper was a Catcher in high school; we immediately sent him to Center, then he moved to right, then he got hurt and now he plays a pretty decent 1B. Every SS we draft can likely be a candidate at 3B, 2B, most OF positions, etc. And you can never have too many arms.

    I want the Nats to stay true to their board and pick the best player available. If that’s Holliday but he wants 11M then i can understand if you say FU to Boras (and also tell him good luck giving his 33yr old Joey Gallo FA clients pillow contracts) and then go to Anderson on a lower dollar amount. Honestly, Boras should know if Holliday doesn’t go 1-1 he’s likely slipping to 1-4 and that 1-4 dollar figure should be his target. But hey, you can’t fault a guy for working for his client.

    Todd Boss

    28 Jun 25 at 10:00 am

  23. There’s no one jumping up and down claiming that Holliday is that much better than anyone else. In fact, last summer on the “showcase circuit” he wasn’t that great. He hasn’t regularly faced quality pitching since. If his dad was Todd Boss, where would he be ranked on this list? The gurus seem very meh about him, like “he has the reputation and the genes, so I guess he should be at the top of my list, despite the well known swing-and-miss issues and the knowledge that he won’t stay at shortstop.”

    Holliday claimed that ranking in a void. As you’ve mentioned, most of these college guys were down the list when the spring started. The exception was Arnold, a steady guy who they weren’t exceptionally excited about either.

    Would anyone rise to stake a claim as being better than these guys? Well, it would be pretty darn hard to do more than Anderson just did, on the biggest collegiate stage. Arquette also hit well in the CWS and was a spark plug for his team. And Doyle had some dominant stretches during the regular season.

    So I don’t buy at all that Holliday is the “best player available,” all the more when you calculate in his relatively high risk. No one is saying he’s a “generational talent.”

    I’ve said several times that I won’t be mad if they pick Holliday. He’s a talented player, and I don’t think he’ll fail. But if there are close-to-equal collegiate options, all are better for this franchise right now, and they likely would sign for $1.5 to 2M less than Holliday and leave the Nats with a nice stash to overpay a high schooler in the 2d or 3d round.

    Also, our starting pitching sucks, and we really could use an Anderson or a Doyle.

    I’ll confess, I was a Doyle-over-Anderson guy, but Anderson has convinced me. He’s very polished now, and he’s got a “projectable” body that should increase his velo. The question mark with him right now seems to be with the quality of his fastball, but he skewered a really good-hitting Arkansas lineup, which includes several draft prospects. That same ARK lineup lit up Doyle in the CWS.

    KW

    28 Jun 25 at 11:25 am

  24. I agree that there’s no way that the Astros did all that on purpose, and you absolutely do have to include the loss of the pool money in the “cost” (though, that too is just subject to a delay discount and not a total loss, since that pool money will be added back the following year and you can do all the same type of maneuvers then).

    Given how it all turned out for them, though, I’m not sure the lesson can be to categorically reject the idea. Even if they were killed at the time in the press, and probably lost some reputational cred with agents and players too.

    And I do certainly agree that it’s a dick move and that the kid in question – assuming he’s not in on it somehow – would be getting totally screwed. Still, some franchises seem to care about that kind of thing, and some don’t, so I can’t imagine that’s a sufficient reason for it to never happen.

    SMS

    28 Jun 25 at 11:27 am

  25. Also, the only NBA draftee going into a lineup is Flagg. I’m glad that MLB doesn’t allow drafting after freshman year, as a lot of those “projection” NBA picks are a joke. Nothing that guys have done in college seems to matter.

    KW

    28 Jun 25 at 11:40 am

  26. For what little it’s worth, Ethan and Matt Holliday were at the Nats/Angels game last night, a meeting of teams with picks #1 and #2.

    KW

    29 Jun 25 at 11:11 am

  27. You have to realize with the 1-1 pick, the Nats are currently negotiating with all potential picks to see what their signing bonus would be. So they will know who would give them a $1m leeway to spend elsewhere. And with the lack of a clear frontrunner, that could be the tipping point.

    VladiHondo

    29 Jun 25 at 4:17 pm

  28. @KW: If Jackson Holliday’s dad was Todd Boss, he would still be awesome 🙂

    Todd Boss

    30 Jun 25 at 11:16 am

  29. @vladi: 100% agree. we’ve touched on this a little bit … but it does bear repeating. Here’s the slot values of the top 5 picks: https://www.mlb.com/news/mlb-draft-2025-bonus-pick-values
    1. Nationals: $11,075,900
    2. Angels: $10,252,700
    3. Mariners: $9,504,400
    4. Rockies: $8,770,900
    5. Cardinals: $8,134,800

    So, lets take Holliday as an example. Nearly every mock i’m seeing right now has Holliday either going 1-1 or slipping to Colorado at 1-4. So, #4 is 8.7M. I’m also seeing over and over that Arnold is now slipping as well, maybe outside top 5.

    So, Do the Nats go to Arnold and his camp, knowing he’s slipping … if Nats say: $8.5M take or leave it … Arnold’s camp has to say yes. B/c if he slips to #6/#7 he’s not getting $8.5M. Same with Holliday: if Nats offer him #4 money or slightly more, and Colorado is saying “slot or forget it” then…now Holliday has to decide if he wants to take $9M from Washington or take less money for Colorado.

    What seems increasingly clear is … not one of these top candidates seems like they’re going to get anywhere close to slot this year.

    Todd Boss

    30 Jun 25 at 11:21 am

  30. Just listened to the Baseball America podcast that accompanied their v5.0 Mock released yesterday and got this chilling tidbit of information that I didn’t know previously: Kade Anderson is ALSO represented by Scott Boras. So, apparently the two players we’re considering at 1-1 are both represented by the same frigging guy, which means we have zero leverage to play them off against each other. Great. BA staff also surmised that Holliday, whether drafted 1-1 or 1-4, would get the highest bonus in this draft. Which makes me wonder if Boras isn’t cutting a deal with Colorado to bring their favored son home… and if that actually does play into our getting Anderson at 1-1 with a bit of a haircut.

    Todd Boss

    1 Jul 25 at 8:24 am

Leave a Reply