Though I was traveling all weekend (bad timing to try to cover a Sunday evening event properly), I was able to tape and quickly watch the first 15 minutes or so of the 2025 draft to catch the top picks.
To say that the mock drafters were wrong all spring would be a huge understatement, starting at the top.
The Nats come out of nowhere to pick Eli Willits out of an Oklahoma HS at 1-1. Nobody all spring had Willits on the Nats’ radar, and I (and the MLB TV pundits) were in shock.
My quick thoughts: this really sends a weird message from the team. They just fired their long-standing GM presumably because they were disappointed in the direction of the team … then instead of drafting a polished college guy who might be able to contribute with the current set of stars we have, we draft the youngest ever player to go 1-1 in Willits, who reclassified from the 2026 class and who likely does appear in the majors for half a decade. Willits certainly was a highly ranked player, and ranked a lot higher on some teams’ draft boards simply because of his age. He’s 6′ 1″ 180 pure SS switch hitter whose father was a dirt-balling utility guy in the majors for a few years and who looked like a cut-rate Pete Rose at the plate.
Can’t say I like this pick, at all. I think Anderson is closer to a MLB rotation, I think Doyle could be in a bullpen role in the majors right now, and I think Holliday projects to be a far better player. I can only assume that they got a massive deal on the bonus, which will allow them to “stock up” on more prep kids in the next two days.
Does this pick (and its cascading effects on the rest of the draft) represent a monumental shift in the front office’s thinking now that Rizzo is gone? Maybe. But it certainly doesn’t portend well to the fanbase who have seen 5 straight losing seasons to pick a 17 yr old. Yes, I get it, you don’t draft for “need.” But you also don’t ignore context of where you are as a franchise and where you’re going. To me, this pick sends the following message: “We don’t think we’ve got it, even with Gore and Wood and Abrams and Crews and House, so we’re getting set for the future.” Especially if the pick was made to save dollars for more prep kids today and tomorrow.
I think they may have gone under-slot on #2 as well. we’ll know after things wrap up tomorrow but watching the big club play right now is tough. if the interim GM and the rest of the team is going to stay on board, I hope they have some bold deals in place and they start doing a better job of developing them.
FredMD
14 Jul 25 at 8:24 am
Definitely going over-slot with savings for Pick #3, who projects as a mid-2nd rounder.
Man, is this team about to punt on the entire MLB team for the rest of the decade and “regroup” for 2030? Because a prep kid drafted today isn’t going to produce til then unless they’re an all-star.
Todd Boss
14 Jul 25 at 8:37 am
Question: do we think the slot savings for Willits at 1-1 are so significant that the club will spread them around to multiple HS picks who would otherwise go to school? I think in the past they’ve used similar savings to target one player (e.g., Sykora). I think the Nats as a franchise are in a position where quantity really matters–if taking Willits instead of Anderson leads you to getting three blue chip prospects rather than two, I think it could make sense strategically.
For me, the big problem with Willits is that his (young) age seems to be driving so much of his perceived value. I think the Fangraphs guy said many teams’ models had Willits at the top. I have some suspicion that age predicts success in such a granular way. Like, all things equal, a guy at 17.8 is likely a better prospect than a guy at 18.9 or something. But can these models reliably distinguish between two guys at 17.8? It feels like it could be a bit tautological.
On balance, I think taking such a young guy (and using the savings on Willits to take other young guys) increases the probability of a Gore trade. I don’t think they end up trading Gore, but I do think it’s now more likely they do.
Even if we don’t necessarily like what it means for the org to take prep players, I think it probably does reflect a sober analysis by the FO regarding when the club is likely to compete for a playoff spot. And, in general, “sober analysis” is a lot better than “hope everything works out.”
Derek
14 Jul 25 at 9:46 am
@Derek: Yes I do. I think they probably saved $2.5 to $3M on that pick. That, along with hundreds of thousands of dollars more saved in the mid-rounds could get them an extra $1.5M to two more kids along the way. We already see a 3rd rounder prep kid who probably nets at least $1m more.
Totally agree that Willits’ age seems like a massive factor in some systems. I really, really hope that’s not what influenced the team here.
Todd Boss
14 Jul 25 at 10:08 am
@Derek, I had the same thought on Gore.
FredMD
14 Jul 25 at 10:30 am
Surprised at the pick, but you have to trust the scouts.
We all follow the popular prospect rankings and the best known media MLB prospect gurus. They had Willits in the 4-5 range.
That said, none of those guys are actual scouts or in an MLB front office, if Danny Haas and those working under him, truly thought that Willits was the most talented and projects as the best future MLB player, you have to take him. You have to trust your eval process.
Willits has elite grades in every category, including the hit tool and his run tool (love guys that can run), but power. Also, since when did the Nats have an elite prospect that was considered an elite defensive player? Think the lack of defense is a big reason why the Nats have disappointed.
He’s 17 and power is the last skill to develop. So, maybe his power grade will escalate as Willits fills out.
FWIW, until a few months ago, Willits was HS class of 2026, with another year of development, maybe Willits would have been the clear 1-1 next year, and the Nats get him a season early.
Understand that there is more at play (like a deal before the draft to save Nats draft pool money to lure other highly rated prospects in the later rounds), but if the Nats felt Holliday or Anderson or Hernandez, where better prospects, it would have been insane to not take of them.
Truly believe that the Nats rated Willits as the top prospect in this draft AND they thought they could negotiate a deal which would allow flexibility in later rounds.
Really interested to track Willits development verus Holliday. Lots of room for second guessing.
Pilchard
14 Jul 25 at 10:42 am
Unfortunately, this does seem to predict a pretty near-future Gore trade. Perhaps not this season, but certainly next season, unless the team’s W/L fortunes skyrocket upwards unexpectedly. Perhaps not the rest of their crew, but Gore seems like a rare enough resource that they’d seek a solid prospect return to hep build for the end of the decade instead of competing now.
Which is super frustrating for sure, both as a fan and as someone who thinks Rizzo has to be pretty pissed here. I mean, Rizzo just lost his job b/c the team can’t win … but the team isn’t spending any damn money!! You just cannot tell me that this team would be a 70-win team this year if Rizzo had $100m to spend on payroll. I just refuse to believe that.
Todd Boss
14 Jul 25 at 10:45 am
HS’ers in rounds 3,4,5!
FredMD
14 Jul 25 at 12:07 pm
If the Nats do trade Gore before the end of the month, with the lack of any viable options from the farm and with Williams out for the year, the Nats will have the worst starting pitching staff in MLB, includng the Rockies. That’s saying something.
Ogasawara has 9+ ERA and 1.8 WHIP, and really think that a fair reflection of his talent versus MLB hitters. Similarly, Cavalli has a 5+ ERA and 1.5 WHIP in AAA; what are the other options? Lara? Frightening.
Pilchard
14 Jul 25 at 1:31 pm
I’ll wait until the draft is over to judge the Willits pick, but i really just don’t understand the hype that justified Willit being is consideration for the first round, much less 1-1.
For example, which scouting grade would you prefer?
Scouting grades: Hit: 50 | Power: 50 | Run: 45 | Arm: 55 | Field: 50, HS SS
Or
Scouting grades: Hit: 60 | Power: 45 | Run: 60 | Arm: 55 | Field: 55, HS SS
Obviously the 2nd guy is slightly better. But the first player is Coy James, who we picked in the 5th round, while the 2nd guy is obviously Willits, who beyond my comprrhension has been picked 1-1. The only way this makes sense is if they can add a couple more top 100 prospects in the next couple rounds through Willits’ severely underslot deal. Let’s see how it goes!
Will
14 Jul 25 at 2:07 pm
Mlb.com gives Willits an overall grade of 60 (same as Ethan Holliday). They give James a 45. That’s not slightly better.
The team is doing well with the $ we saved on Willits, IMHO. We’ve never drafted five players inside mlb.com’s top 100 with our first five picks; not even when we have competitive balance picks (like last year with the Hunter Harvey trade).
Chris
14 Jul 25 at 2:14 pm
FWIW (not much) Willits has been on the radar screen as a possible dark horse selection for weeks on some sites. Ghost at TN in particular has mentioned the club’s interest in Willits.
Of course, my one prediction about the draft was that, no matter who the selection was, Nats fans would hate it. Which has proven true, although there has been somewhat less than I expected.
As for the team not being a “70 win team” if Rizzo had $100M to spend, that’s certainly true … IF Rizzo had spent the money on the RIGHT players. If he had spent that money on Santander, Walker, Pederson, Montas, O’Neil, (etc.), the team could absolutely still be a 70 win team only now with a ton of contracts to pay off. No bueno. I mention this conversationally, since you have already stated that you refuse to believe the premise.
John C.
14 Jul 25 at 2:14 pm
Yikes, 4 straight college seniors in rounds 6 to 9! This suggests we might not even have made massive slot savings on Willits, if we’re pinching pennies on underslot guys here…
Will
14 Jul 25 at 2:18 pm
In addition to Ghost at TN mentioning Willits as a possible #1/#1 for the Nationals, yesterday morning Sam Sellick at FBB posted an article noting that there was industry chatter that Willits was very much in the mix for the selection.
John C.
14 Jul 25 at 2:24 pm
Eh, I think it more just means that #2 was a slot deal, vs some folks who thought there might have been some savings there.
What do we think the savings on Willits were? $2.5M? I think that #3, #4 and #5 are going to combine to need a good chunk more than that, so I’m not surprised to see them saving another $1M with seniors in rounds 6-10.
Of course, the optimistic take is that they still have one more name lined up for #11 when they can the extra 150k pool free. But I think that’s less than a 50/50 chance. We’ll see soon enough!
SMS
14 Jul 25 at 2:32 pm
@Will: I don’t think that the college seniors says much about the slot savings on Willits because they need money not just for Harmon at #3, but for the HS kids that they took at #4-#5 (a pitcher and another SS). They are pinching pennies #6-#9 in order to stack more money to throw at those guys to convince them to forego college commitments.
John C.
14 Jul 25 at 2:35 pm
The Willits had been at least mentioned as top pick candidate for awhile and even the most popular mock drafts had him in the top 5. Would bet that the Nats weren’t the only MLB team that had Willits as the #1 pick on the draft board.
Look at every team’s draft picks in round 6, 7, 8, 9. It’s almost all college players. There is a playbook as to how to maximize savings in the draft to sign key pieces.
Not going to lose any sleep on the Nats passing on Kade Anderson (who is 4+ years into his first TJ and has a limited upside) and Liam Doyle who is a max effort guy with limited secondary pitches.
The comparison will always be “does Willits out-perform Ethan Holliday”.
Pilchard
14 Jul 25 at 2:37 pm
Exactly @John C – I’m surprised learned Nats fans like the ones that frequent this site were surprised by Willits. Lots of tea leaves pointing to him over the past few days.
@Will our 3rd, 4th and 5th round picks out of HS absolutely show we saved money on Willits. We’re talking about highly rated, top 100 kids committed to Ole Miss, LSU and Mississippi State. Going to take some cash to buy them out of those commitments. Big cash.
Chris
14 Jul 25 at 2:38 pm
New posted on our first 10 picks, with some guesses on bonus dollars and how they’re saved and to be spent.
As for being “surprised” by Willits, absolutely him going 1-1 was a huge surprise. Practically every mock draft pundit for weeks had the Nats eitehr on Anderson or Holliday, with Willits a favorite to go 5th to StL. LIke, nearly all of them. It wasn’t a surprise he went in the top 5, it was a surprise he went 1st overall. Bremner going #2 was even more surprising.
Todd Boss
14 Jul 25 at 4:59 pm
Yes Todd, Tress Way has been summoned and the Nats are punting. Four high schoolers and an immobile collegiate 1B with contact issues do not an immediate future improvement make.
I like the looks of Harmon. There, I said something nice.
Overall, I wonder if this is finally the draft that breaks the obsession with high schoolers. Probably not, but good grief, five HS shortstops in the top 10 overall picks, and 12 total in the first round. Misery loves company I guess.
Interesting to see the Phils pull something worthy of the Nats of a few years ago: top eight picks all pitchers, with seven collegians plus a falling high schooler who will want a big over slot.
O’s make out like bandits with Irish and Aloy falling to them. They also bet on Bodine’s hit tool over Stevenson’s power one.
KW
14 Jul 25 at 5:22 pm