Author Topic: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?  (Read 671 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 26072
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #25: April 12, 2024, 12:00:41 PM »
12 teams make the playoffs, that's reasonable.  The Nats are stuck in the bottom 5 or 6 with little help on the way.  Also don't think a big boom pitching contract would change much.  Makes sense to put the $ to hitters, but at some point have to develop guys who can make it through 6 and keep the pitch count at 100, even with a 4-something ERA.  This org hasn't been able to do that with anyone and there's no one in the system showing any potential to do so.
If Cavalli is just decent he will be a “big” help. Replacing maybe Williams this year and Corbin beyond.  Will also help if Irvin does not turn into a pumpkin.  They have a number 10 pick in this draft and probably a top 5 next year.  It’s too bad they could not get Skenes last year. 

Offline Senatorswin

  • Posts: 1821
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #26: April 12, 2024, 01:02:57 PM »
Did you look at who was right behind the Nats this year in team ERA? 

Braves were 15th last year in team ERA. 17th for starters.  They win based on hitting.

Baltimore does appear to be in good shape.

Some of the others you mention have been brutal for years.

The Braves are first in the league in swinging at the first pitch which many perceive as the Darnell Coles philosophy of hitting. Thing is the Braves are first in OBP, slugging, OPS, and average. I guess the trick is to actually have hitters who can hit once they swing.

The Orioles have Holiday, Henderson and Rutschman batting back-to-back-to-back 9th, 1st and 2nd. Holiday drafted 1st round 2022, Henderson 2nd round 2019 and Rutschman round 1 2019. The Rays and Orioles scouting has to be the envy of the league. Win with a low payroll.

Offline welch

  • Posts: 16487
  • The Sweetest Right Handed Swing in 1950s Baseball
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #27: April 12, 2024, 01:21:15 PM »

The Nats fought one extra year in 2021, adding a couple of hitters: Josh Bell and Kyle Schwarber. They expected Victor Robles to improve out to the potential (see Fangraphs prediction); expected Kieboom to be a good replacement for Rendon; added Josh Harrison as a vet infielder; added "the great" Brad Hand; added Jon Lester; and expected Stephen Strasburg to be himself. I think we were talking, here, about who the Nats would add at the trade deadline.

Strasburg could not pitch, although he started the season well...as best I remember. Then he went on the DL. When he had to be shut down -- about the same time that Schwarber tore a hamstring -- it was all over. Robles and Kieboom were showing themselves to be true .200 hitters. For the first time in years, the trade deadline did not matter.

Scherzer said that he did not want to pitch into a rebuild. Trea rejected an extension, and got a free-agent contract for $25 million a year until he is 40. Not close to what the Nats have offered anyone, and longer even than their extension to Zim. The Nats got Kiebert and Gray and two chumps. Could they have gotten better players? I don't know.

They also picked up Lane Thomas for Lester, who could not pitch anymore.

That offseason, the Nats could have filled up with more free agents, but everyone here insisted, sensibly, that it was time to tank. And tank again after 2022 and 2023.

Could they have drafted better? Maybe. It makes no sense to compare the Nats drafting to the Orioles-Browns, because that bush-league team tanks for years and years. In 2019, the Nats won it all, while Baltimore won 54 games. In 2018, Baltimore won 47 games. They had a losing record in 2017, and had a winning record all the way back in 2016. Meanwhile, from 2012 onward, the Nats went to the playoffs or came close.

Corbin's contract rolls off this season. Williams, a crafty righty, will probably go to the bullpen  Young pitchers? aside from Gore and Gray, Irvin looked decent last season. Cavalli will return, and was good in Spring Training last year. Henry had TOS, so who knows? Rutledge has looked pretty good, but was hit around the foot with a line-drive yesterday...so who knows when he will get back? Jake Bennett looked good until he went out with TJS last season. The wisdom here has been that "There is No Such Thing as a Starting Pitching Prospect". I remember waiting through the draft as the Nats came closer and closer to being able to draft Kumar Rocker. If anyone is really curious, here is a list of all the Mets' first round picks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_York_Mets_first-round_draft_picks

The draft is chancy.


Offline IanRubbish

  • Posts: 775
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #28: April 12, 2024, 01:52:54 PM »
The Braves are first in the league in swinging at the first pitch which many perceive as the Darnell Coles philosophy of hitting.

Sort of.  The Nats are #1 at chasing pitches outside the zone, which leads to low P/IP for opposing pitchers.

But overall the pitching is a far bigger concern than the hitting.  When Stras and J-Zimm came up, they walked around 2 per 9 IP.  There's no one like that now in the system, nor is there anyone with high K rates.  The Hickey Shuffle is the standard up and down the org.  A lot of sinkers, sliders, sweepers, cutters, and secondary pitches that are aimed for the edges of the strike zone, and often end up a good foot outside of it. Result is almost always throwing more pitches than the opposition, a gassed buillpen, and 800+ runs against.  Only need to get to average with 12 teams making the playoffs, but even that is a challenge with the current pitching and development philosophy.

Online Five Banners

  • Posts: 2309
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #29: April 12, 2024, 02:17:09 PM »

But overall the pitching is a far bigger concern than the hitting.  When Stras and J-Zimm came up, they walked around 2 per 9 IP.  There's no one like that now in the system, nor is there anyone with high K rates.  The Hickey Shuffle is the standard up and down the org.  A lot of sinkers, sliders, sweepers, cutters, and secondary pitches that are aimed for the edges of the strike zone, and often end up a good foot outside of it. Result is almost always throwing more pitches than the opposition, a gassed buillpen, and 800+ runs against.  Only need to get to average with 12 teams making the playoffs, but even that is a challenge with the current pitching and development philosophy.

This is what seemed to make it imperative to get at least one starting pitcher, as reportedly indicated by Rizzo to have been a priority this off-season. Not getting anything done whatsoever on that front goes to the question of whether this is actually a rebuild. 

Offline CoryTheFormerExposFan

  • Posts: 1939
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #30: April 12, 2024, 03:08:39 PM »
It’s impossible to judge right now.  The major acts of the rebuild have been the Max/Trea trade, the Soto trade, and the last few drafts.  As of now, the Soto trade looks to potentially be an excellent return, and the Max/Trea return isn’t terrible? But Gray and Ruiz need to take a few steps forward, which they still are young enough to do.

Recent drafts have been better, although Green is a potential bust, although also very early.  The international free agents have been promising.

Offline imref

  • Posts: 43249
  • Re-contending in 202...5?
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #31: April 12, 2024, 03:43:29 PM »
FWIW, if the plan was to tank this year again for Ethan Holliday in 2025, the White Sox will be tough to pass. They are worse than the Wizards.

Offline varoadking

  • Posts: 29622
  • King of Goodness
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #32: April 12, 2024, 04:23:15 PM »
FWIW, if the plan was to tank this year again for Ethan Holliday in 2025, the White Sox will be tough to pass. They are worse than the Wizards.

Mike Rizzo says "Hold my beer."

Offline imref

  • Posts: 43249
  • Re-contending in 202...5?
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #33: April 12, 2024, 05:23:44 PM »
Mike Rizzo says "Hold my beer."

We'd need Gallo, Abrams, and Thomas to have season-ending injuries to have a chance at playing at their level.

Online Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 26072
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #34: April 12, 2024, 06:31:02 PM »
We'd need Gallo, Abrams, and Thomas to have season-ending injuries to have a chance at playing at their level.
Don’t the bottom three teams have the same chance at the number one pick?

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 63416
  • THE SUMMONER OF THE REVERSE JINX
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #35: April 12, 2024, 06:46:58 PM »
If Cavalli is just decent he will be a “big” help. Replacing maybe Williams this year and Corbin beyond.  Will also help if Irvin does not turn into a pumpkin.  They have a number 10 pick in this draft and probably a top 5 next year.  It’s too bad they could not get Skenes last year. 
I dunno why but Im bullish on Cavalli. Him and Gore will make a nice top of the rotation

Online Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 26072
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #36: April 12, 2024, 06:55:53 PM »
I dunno why but Im bullish on Cavalli. Him and Gore will make a nice top of the rotation
And Irvin and Gray may be a decent back end.  It’s funny to say we shouldn’t be looking at free agent pitchers when much of the success was built on the Scherzer signing.  And the initial Strasburg extension.  Of course Rizzo gets no credit for those around here anymore.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 63416
  • THE SUMMONER OF THE REVERSE JINX
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #37: April 12, 2024, 07:25:11 PM »
And Irvin and Gray may be a decent back end.  It’s funny to say we shouldn’t be looking at free agent pitchers when much of the success was built on the Scherzer signing.  And the initial Strasburg extension.  Of course Rizzo gets no credit for those around here anymore.
I've already gone on record saying I want Corbin Burnes in free agency. I'd love to create a situation where Irvin and Gray have to battle for the number 5 spot.

Im almost wondering if Gray would be better out of the pen.

Offline Senatorswin

  • Posts: 1821
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #38: April 12, 2024, 10:12:16 PM »
FWIW, if the plan was to tank this year again for Ethan Holliday in 2025, the White Sox will be tough to pass. They are worse than the Wizards.

Fun fact about the Wizards. When NC State won the ACC tournament in Capital One Arena by winning 5 straight games, they had won more games in that arena than the Wizards had at that time.

Offline imref

  • Posts: 43249
  • Re-contending in 202...5?
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #39: April 12, 2024, 10:39:33 PM »
Fun fact about the Wizards. When NC State won the ACC tournament in Capital One Arena by winning 5 straight games, they had won more games in that arena than the Wizards had at that time.
The Wiz are at least showing some signs of being competitive as the season winds down.

Online Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 26072
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #40: April 12, 2024, 10:44:20 PM »
The Wiz are at least showing some signs of being competitive as the season winds down.
Probably more that other teams are resting guys or don’t care at this time of the season.

We need to be all in for the Cooper Flagg tank next season. 

Offline CoryTheFormerExposFan

  • Posts: 1939
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #41: April 12, 2024, 11:05:45 PM »
I've already gone on record saying I want Corbin Burnes in free agency. I'd love to create a situation where Irvin and Gray have to battle for the number 5 spot.

Im almost wondering if Gray would be better out of the pen.

Do we want to sign a 30 year old pitcher to a mega long-term deal and potentially end up with another Stras/Corbin contract in a few years?  I’d rather do like the Braves with fairly big short-term deals on vets like Morton and Sale.  We have enough young bats both currently up and in the system, we need to nail the next few drafts with top 10 college pitchers.

Gray has shown his floor is an average starting pitcher, and he’s young enough with the pedigree to potentially take a step and be above average.  When starting pitching is so hard to stack depth with, you don’t move him to the pen.

Online nobleisthyname

  • Posts: 2813
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #42: April 13, 2024, 08:29:36 AM »
Gray has shown his floor is an average starting pitcher, and he’s young enough with the pedigree to potentially take a step and be above average.  When starting pitching is so hard to stack depth with, you don’t move him to the pen.

Has Gray shown that his floor is an average pitcher? He's only had one season that was not below average (last year) and all the underlying metrics suggest he was getting lucky.

In my opinion Gray would be a nice depth piece on a truly competitive team, like the 6th or 7th option that slots in when one of the main rotation arms goes down for whatever reason.

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 40173
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #43: April 13, 2024, 08:35:13 AM »
 Fedde during his Nats time.

Online nobleisthyname

  • Posts: 2813
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #44: April 13, 2024, 08:42:04 AM »
Fedde during his Nats time.

I was thinking of John Lannan since Gray was the OD starter this year like Lannan used to be on the old bad Nats teams only to be pushed out of the rotation once they actually got good.

But I just looked at Lannan's numbers again and he was better than I remember, certainly better than Gray is now. That 2012 rotation was just stacked (and mostly injury free).

Offline IanRubbish

  • Posts: 775
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #45: April 13, 2024, 10:13:15 AM »
Do we want to sign a 30 year old pitcher to a mega long-term deal and potentially end up with another Stras/Corbin contract in a few years? 

No.  I agree with your thinking.  The need isn't a big arm, but for drafting and development to get fixed after so many years of failing. 

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 40173
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #46: April 13, 2024, 12:38:00 PM »
I was thinking of John Lannan since Gray was the OD starter this year like Lannan used to be on the old bad Nats teams only to be pushed out of the rotation once they actually got good.

But I just looked at Lannan's numbers again and he was better than I remember, certainly better than Gray is now. That 2012 rotation was just stacked (and mostly injury free).
I forgot Lannan appeared in 2012, but he made 6 starts over 32 IP and won 4 of them. Gray's stuff is better than Lannan, but his results aren't.

Gray needs improvement in refining his pitches rather than just adding more. He can't succeed without better command

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 63416
  • THE SUMMONER OF THE REVERSE JINX
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #47: April 13, 2024, 01:08:04 PM »
Has Gray shown that his floor is an average pitcher? He's only had one season that was not below average (last year) and all the underlying metrics suggest he was getting lucky.

In my opinion Gray would be a nice depth piece on a truly competitive team, like the 6th or 7th option that slots in when one of the main rotation arms goes down for whatever reason.
Half a season. Second half his ERA was 4.76

Offline CoryTheFormerExposFan

  • Posts: 1939
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #48: April 13, 2024, 02:00:59 PM »
With the way starting pitchers are going down, not that this is breaking news, but as an organization you simply need depth of younger controllable starting pitching, and as I said above, I’d rather supplement them with short-term deals for vets that are good but not quiet “Aces.” 

Rizzo always spent his free agency money on starting pitching, but those are often terrible investments long-term.  Max is the exception.  You are much more likely to see a bat maintain their level of play deep into their long-term contract.

With the way things stand, we have 2 almost sure thing stud OF prospects, then several others with potential.  I doubt we need to sign a free agent OF in this rebuild.

Abrams obviously has SS locked, and you really hope House has 3B and Morales 1B.  Ruiz is the catcher for better or worse, so hopefully he improves.  Maybe Lipscomb becomes the 2B of the future?  Either way, we shouldn’t need to spend a ton on position players.

My hope is we have some “extra” position player depth emerge in the system that can be flipped for pitching.  I think the focus in the first round of the next few drafts should be college pitchers.

We’re going to have to go out and spend on a big-time free agent SP in the next few years.  Gray, Cavalli, and Irvin could be worthy of being in a rotation, and Gore might become something close to an Ace.  Rarely do Ace starting pitchers hit the market at 28 or younger unfortunately. 

Offline imref

  • Posts: 43249
  • Re-contending in 202...5?
Re: How Would You Grade the Rebuild So Far?
« Reply #49: April 13, 2024, 06:45:16 PM »
Just need another trade with the Padres.