Last weekend before THE TEST

The Nats are a .500-ish team but as I've noted they've managed that in part by luck and part by schedule. The former is up to the baseball gods but the latter shifts like sand and there is a sandstorm coming. After facing the sort of in trouble Blue Jays the Nats have the following schedule 

• Orioles - Great!
• Red Sox - Surprisingly good!
• White Sox - probably the worst team in baseball, them or the Rockies
• Phillies - good
• Twins - good
• Mariners - good
• Braves - great
• Guardians - great
• Mets - good
• Braves - great
• Tigers - maybe good, we'll see when the Nats get there
  

YIKES! 

That's a LOOOONG stretch of playing teams that are good. 34 games to be precise.  If how they have played holds they'll enter that stretch maybe at 17-17 and exit like 28-40. 

The rest of the season sets up as mildly favorable but only very mildly so. Part of that is because the NL East is pretty good and they've only played two series against teams, one being a Marlins series. Part of that is because in this stretch the two bad teams they do face are AL teams they only play once, leaving only two more for the last ~100 games. And part of it is it being mildly favorable assumes the D-backs don't get out of their funk being probably the unluckiest team by record this year. So it's not like if they stumble here they are likely to rocket back out.

We've determined the Nats are better than the Marlins. That was good. Now we dig in and determine if the Nats really are better than last year. A good start would be beating up on the Blue Jays while they can

One month in - what should your focus be on?

The Nats did not get out of the month with Davey's first winning April. But 14-15 is a pleasant surprise. Of course it is early and a mere 13-16 probably fits with most projections, if not that 12-17 certainly does so small sample size caveats hold. 

We (we being me and most people) often say Memorial Day weekend is the time when you look at things and can think "oh this might be real". It's a full third of the season in and gives plenty of time for the hot or cold week-10days-two weeks to balance out. That being said this first month is the information we have and sets us up for what to try to follow in the next 30 days to see if it is real or not. 

Note guys like Ruiz, Senzel, Ildemaro Vargas, Mitchell Parker, Jacob Barnes have the equivalent of 2+ weeks of play and so even by Memorial Day it'd be fair to still have lingering questions. We'll leave them off this list.  

1) CJ Abrams superstar?  The guy is on pace for a season hitting .295 approaching 40/40. If that's not a fluke the Nats have gotten a huge lift into being contenders again. His average is consistent and the speed is undeniable so what we're really watching is the homers (only 1 in past 9 games) is he THAT guy or is he a 20-25 homer type that had his best month? Either way he's still great*

2) Can Jesse Winker stay healthy? Winker has been good in the past but has been unable to ever stay healthy, which can account for various terrible outcomes all over the place. It's clear the guy has talent but also clear the first injury might derail his whole season. I guess staying healthy until May doesn't guarantee anything but it'd be nice to get as much "good Winker" as the Nats can. Especially since Gallo looks like a huge swing and miss. Joke Intended. 47.3% K-rate!

3) Is the Joey Meneses Era over? Joey burst onto the scene two years ago, but given a full-time position last year basically broke even, which wouldn't normally be enough given he brings nothing else to a team but his bat but the Nats were very bad. His BABIP doesn't suggest bad luck and while he should have A homer or two, if he's hitting mostly not hard balls on the ground, which he is, well this is the end of Meneses the major leaguer.

4) MacKenzie Gore #1 Starter? K-rate is up, BB-rate is down, HR-rate is down. It seems like the sacrifice to that is a few more hits but guess what? That's the least important thing unless you are giving up 15 line drive singles a game. He's getting a bit lucky with those homers but otherwise pitched to this stat line. It's bordering on a #1. Much like Abrams if he hits on this the Nats have a huge lift in their plan giving them an arm to build around. 

5) How good (or not good) is Trevor Williams? I mean he wasn't terrible during his career, he just couldn't make it work as a starter before this month. The stats say he can't keep this up. He is inducing more ground balls and walking fewer (good!), but his homer rate and BABIP rate all are saying he's getting lucky. Assuming they all swing back well it could leave him as average with moderate swings or terrible with strong ones. Williams has provided a nice steady presence in the rotation around which you can evaluate guys like Irvin and Parker. If he can at least stay average that can continue but if he busts that's more strain on the pen. 

6) Is the pen really good? Harvey continues to show the makings of a star reliever, even if he has yet to get the results, but guys like Law and Floro, have done well focusing mostly on keeping the ball in the park. With Finnegan, probably the 4th or 5th best pitcher, in the save spot like a modern-day Todd Jones that leaves the better pitchers available to face the best hitters in the toughest situations. If one more guy can come around the pen could really be something special I think.  Rainey unfortunately looks broken but I liked the bet on Matt Barnes. I'd say go the the minors but Rochester's pen is complete trash. Go to AA? A lot of guys there look interesting.  They need to start pushing them into AAA. But that's off-topic.  For May I guess it's watching Law and Floro to see if they hold and Matt Barnes to see if he can step up

*at the plate - he's secretly a really bad SS! But shhhh.

Monday Quickie - Better than the Marlins

So that answers that. At least as far as I think.  Yes, the Nats have played a relatively easy schedule and yes, they've gotten a bit lucky by the metrics, but I think checking out the first three games of this series, there's no doubt they are the better team. They have what looks like a complete offensive player in Abrams, a young pitcher rounding into form in Gore and a bullpen full of fairly good bets that turned into a solid pen. Add in a few FA and returning surprises and it's a competitive team. Are they really .500 ish? Nah. but let's see how long they can pretend to be because if it gets into June some kids might come up and then they may not need to pretend.  Fake it till you make it. 

Let's take a look around the league! 

NL East

The Braves are good. The Phillies are good. The Mets are ok.

To get into it more - the Braves' offense is deep mixing guys likely to cool down (D'Arnaud) and guys likely to heat up (Acuna) They had SP injury worry but the minor league depth of a few years ago finally is paying off as Bryce Elder has stepped in nicely. In the meantime Reynaldo Lopez has looked very good? 

The Phillies are more a hot and cold offense (Castellanos is currently dead) but their pitching as been great. Ranger Suarez got his control under control and the gamble on the injured Spencer Turnball paid off. Caleb Cotham, who came in when Zach Wheeler did seems like an excellent pitching coach.

The Mets pitching, especially the pen has been a strong suit but their hitting is a bunch of below average bats. Neither Alvarez or Baty have become anything yet. Feels like they could get better but they are the Mets so...

NL Central

There isn't a really good team here. The Brewers can hit. The only guys not are their prospects Frelick and Chourio. But their SP and RP are both super shallow. The Cubs basically the same on the mound, but aren't hitting as well. The Reds are more consistent throwers but good or bad at the plate. De La Cruz though is a stud. The Pirates can pitch and might be interesting next year with Skenes if they add some bats. The Cardinals can't hit. Turns out they bet wrong and sent the better OFs (Thomas, O'Neill) away

NL West

The Dodgers finally turned on the jets and have begun separation. They are great they just have to figure out what pieces aren't working anymore (Chris Taylor) and replace those parts with what they have in house which will work. The D-backs should climb out of their hole. They can hit and the pitching is ok. The Padres don't have enough arms. The Giants don't have enough relief pitching. The Rockies don't have enough anything.

AL East

Yankees are holding off the Orioles. Soto is the engine that lineup needed but the young guys are coming through and the pitching all turned around from last years "everyone's worst year" issue. But the Orioles, once they get the pitching in order (it's ok) will be hard to hold off. Have you seen that lineup? 8 players deep with one guy at 30 and everyone younger. Scary. Red Sox are surprising thanks to several "Why is that guy playing like THAT" performances. The Blue Jays are depressing because they aren't old but the young guys at the plate all seem to have regressed already and they were supposed to carry an averageish staff. The Rays are lost at the plate without their rapist of the future, and the pen feels like it's finally run out of young arms to break.

AL Central 

The best division or the division that gets to play the White Sox? Hard to tell. Indians line-up is solid and bullpen is great, which cover their minor rotation woes. I have no idea how the Royals are scoring runs but the pitching is mostly good. The Tigers are basically the Royals without the runs scoring luck. If their kids ever hit they could turn a corner. The Twins are America's average team who could use another starter or two (like your average team!). The White Sox are trash but Erick Fedde is good?

AL West

Like the NL Central if it has two Cardinals teams and the White Sox. The Mariners have a fantastic pen and don't really have a rotation hole, but are a bat off. The Rangers are fine at the plate, but need one more reliable starter, or more likely for some sleeping bats like Seager to wake up. The A's stink but have cobbled together a workable staff and the pen is actually good. For the 99th year in a row the Angels have no pitching.* The Astros have caught some bad luck scoring runs but their pitching has absolutely imploded.

 

 

*For former Nats prospect Alex Meyer to go from the Nats, who looking back didn't show much skill at developing pitchers, to the Twins, possibly the worst SP developers of the 00s and 10s, to the Angels, who have turned out very few pitchers despite overloading on them, was a pretty cruel turn of fate. 

2024 : Battle to gain respect or to avoid embarrasment?

After that disappointing finish to the home stand, the Nats head to Miami for a four game set. I see this as a season-setting series. The Marlins are very bad, but after a 0-9 start they are 6-11. That's like "usual worst team in the majors this year" as opposed to the "is this a historically bad team?" their record might suggest.

The Marlins' starting pitching is fine and back of the pen is fairly reliable and they might be coming around depth-wise on both of these to form a more average ish squad, maybe even good. This is in line with the last couple of years. But their offense remains terrible after they decided to not put money into the what was the obvious problem the past couple seasons. Presumably this cheapness is what ran off people like Jeter and Ng who thought they might be committed to something other than "trying to be the next Rays or A's" There isn't anything about the offense really under-performing.  Old friend Josh Bell should be better, and Arraez could hit a bit more, but this is who they are. They are a team that can't score. The minors aren't sending help. The Nats pitching should keep them in check.

I call this a season-setting series because how the Nats do here could define what this season is about. A 3-1 series win will put the Nats at 13-15 and the Marlins at 7-23.  That's would give the Nats quite a lead over their challengers for the bottom of the NL East. It would set the Nats up for a "ok are they a 70, 75, or even 80 win team" type of season. A 1-3 series loss would put the teams at 11-17 and 9-21 respectively and set the season up for a basement battle. 

In other news. Gore looks really good, huh? Fancy stats aren't telling us much different. His BABIP is actually HIGH which would suggest fewer hits in the future but the HR/FB rate is low and he's giving up a fair number of FB/LDs so that should swing the other way.  Whichever you think is more important would lead you to believe how close he stays to what he has been. 

It's been noted that if the Nats can come out of 2024 with a 1/2 Gore and a star Abrams confirmed, that's a good outcome.  Early returns are promising, but let's see Gore do something he's never done - throw over 150 innings - because the Nats of the future need a 1 or 2 Gore who is actually on the mound in practice, not in theory.

Lane Thomas hurt - Lipscomb not wood gets the call

 Lane Thomas went to the IL and there was some hope James Wood would get the call. Sorry. Trey Lipscomb is back! 

Why? Why replace an OF with an IF? Well from biggest reason to smallest... 

1) Trey is already on the 40-man. So to bring him up you don't have to make room.  You would if bringing up nearly anyone else as the rest of the 40-man is basically injured guys and pitchers. Except... 

2) The OF on the 40-man is Alex Call. They gave Alex a good long trial last year. He can sure field, but he can't hit.  He's currently hitting .212 / .312 in AAA (though with 6 homers?!?!) We don't need to see him again

3) James Wood slowed down a bunch after his start. In his first 10 games James Wood was a house on fire :  .432 / .563 / .757 with just as importantly 8 Ks in 48 PAs. In his last 9 games James Wood is the ashes : .180 / .256 / .205 with just as importantly 14 Ks in 43 PAs almost double the rate. If you wanted an excuse to keep him down he's given you a good one. 

4) As we discussed before, if Wood stays down long enough, he can qualify as a Top 100 prospect the Nats can bring up to start NEXT season and get various rewards if he does well. 

So really I think it's just a roster thing. Rizzo has historically been a guy who will lean toward not forcing roster changes even if the talent being used is sub-optimal. He's not bringing up Wood until he keeps him up forever and he's not doing that now, while Wood is in a slump. 

Oh well.

Monday Quickie - When can we say the Nats are good?

The Nats have had a good start. They continue to be fed by close wins (yesterday was only the second time they've won a game by more than 2 runs) and a relatively weak schedule* but if they are beating the worst that likely means they aren't the worst themselves, which was an honest question to start the year. But of course we only have the start of the year to go on and that's not much.  If you look at all the worst teams last year they all had longer stretches of better baseball at various points. The A's went 13-12 at one point. The Royals finished they year 15-12. The White Sox pulled off a 22-15 stretch, which is actually really good. And the Rockies went 13-8. 

So bad teams do have good stretches. But all of these teams started badly. Some had good Mays, other good Augusts, but no good Aprils. But you don't have to go back too far to find a 100 loss team that started 10-11. The 2022 A's did. The short of it is you don't really know until you get well into a season, like Memorial Day if they Nats are around .500 you can feel pretty good they aren't going end the year with triple digit losses. 

That's a long way away! Well it's a long season. But let's work in reverse.  Let's say the Nats finish April one game around .500. In the past 2 seasons what teams have done that.

In 2023 no one finished the month .500 or one game under. A bunch of teams were one over.

• NYY - finished 82-80
  
• LAA - 73-89
  
• PHI - 90-72
  
• SDP - 82-80
  
• BOS - 78-84
  
• CHC - 83-79
  

In 2022 four teams were around .500

• SEA (+) 90-72
  
• HOU (+) 106-56
  
• PHI (E) 87-75
  
• OAK (-) 60-102
  

 

Huh. Well that didn't help. In 2023 we saw kind of what we'd expect. If your April was around .500 you are probably a .500ish team. You might push a bit higher like the Phillies getting 9 over or fall a little lower like the Angels falling 9 under but the window was there.  In 2022 we saw one team play amazing the rest of the way*** and another team play terribly****. So I guess anything CAN happen.

Ok well we don't know much, other than this is a nice surprise that they team is not starting slow. Whether it is really real and they might be .500, sort of real and they are going to be not good but competitive, or not real at all, well I guess that doesn't matter right now.  But the longer they keep it up the more likely it is this is who they are. That is a fact.

 

*You wouldn't have thought it to be going into the year but that is what it looks like now. The Astros are among the worst teams in baseball. The Dodgers are barely over .500. There is a big mish mosh in the middle of baseball right now with a handful of actually good teams** and the Nats haven't played any of them, except maybe the Philles or Reds (but not both).  Meanwhile they've played the A's, Astros, Rockies, and Giants, half of the worst 8ish teams in the league.

** By record - Yankees, Orioles, Cleveland, Atlanta, Philly, Milwaukee, Cubs.  By stats - Orioles, Red Sox, Guardians, Royals, Atlanta, Mets, Milwaukee, Reds. 

*** The Astros after starting 7-9 would have runs of 15-2, 20-5, and 22-6 during the year. They'd only lose back to back games 8 times the rest of the year and three in a row once.

**** The A's after starting 10-9 would have runs of 7-25, 3-12, and 7-21 during the year.

Average teams win games half the time

There's no doubt about it, the Nats had a good road trip. 5-4 away puts the Nats at 8-10 and not in any contention (the Mets and Phillies have picked up their respective games as expected) but into "decent season" territory which is what they needed to make 2025 one that fans could pins hope to. Of course it's only 18 games but better this than the alternative (see; Marlins, Florida) 

So how did this happen? 

Well somethings are going WAY right.  CJ Abrams, who should have been signed long-term last year, is looking like a star with that power surge noted before continuing. Jesse Winker is hitting like an MVP candidate. Luis Garcia Jr is hitting like we would hope he would. Vargas, taking over 3B now, is very good. Gore is looking very good, and so is Trevor Williams? And Jake Irvin? The bullpen - that looked like a possible strength before is forming into that

But there are things going wrong. Gray's performance and injury. Kiebert's injury. Thomas and Meneses are both terrible. Corbin is Corbin. Rainey hasn't been good ... I guess. The bullpen has been good. 

It seems like these things should even out somewhat, right? 

Here's the thing... they should and it is? 

The Nats are 8-10.  8-10 is a 72 win season.  Better than expected but last year they won 71 games. While people like me will be excited by 72 because we know last season was a bit of a fluke, regular fans will probably get less excited if this is where the Nats are headed come August. It won't feel like that step forward. 

Also luck has been on their side.  Pythag has them as more a 7 win team. Adjusted standings right at 8.  Or for those that don't like fancy stats : They are 5-0 in games decided by 2 runs. Things like that generally don't hold.

Are the Nats better than they should be? Probably a little. Are they also better than expected? Probably a little. There will be reckonings (Winker, Williams, Irvin, Finnegan) and comebacks (Rosario, Ruiz, Thomas, Rainey) and the Nats might have a couple actual stars (Abrams, Harvey). It's not a season that is shaping up to have a floor that isn't 50+ wins and that's great.