Author Topic: One Player You Would Have Wanted To Have Been A Nat  (Read 665 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online imref

  • Posts: 33761
  • Redemption
Good point. I was not thinking in terms of trades. Although, in the real world, Zimmerman was already in his mega-contract at this point, so it would have been nigh impossible to move him at that point.

But speaking of the middle of the order, I remain fixated on that 2017 team which went wire-to-wire and fizzled in the NLDS. That middle of the order was arguably the best in MLB since Murderers' Row:

Bryce Harper - .319/.413/.595; OPS+ of 156; 27 doubles, 29 HR, 87 RBI
Ryan Zimmerman - .303/.358/.573; OPS+ of 134; 33 doubles, 36 HR, 108 RBI
Daniel Murphy - .322/.384/.543; OPS+ of 136; 43 doubles, 23 HR, 93 RBI
Anthony Rendon - .301/.403/.533; OPS+ of 139; 41 doubles, 25 HR, 100 RBI

I can't think of another team which had four players in the middle of the order who averaged over .300 with almost 30 HR and 100 RBI (technically 28.25 HR and 97 RBI). Even Murderers' Row technically only had two power hitters in Ruth and Gehrig.  And that's not even counting having a fairly good lead-off hitter with Trea Turner's .284/.338/.451 line with 24 doubles, 6 triples, 11 HR, 46 steals and 45 RBI. And probably Michael A. Taylor's best season as a Nat (.271/.320/.486, 23 doubles, 3 triples, 19 HR, 17 steals, 53 RBI). And Howie and Adam Lind.

That's why I went with a dominant starter, since when I look at the 2019 WS team I see the big difference as having a virtually interchangeable 1-2-3 rotation to dominate in a playoff series.  Although, to be fair, Gio Gonzalez was a 6.3 WAR player in 2017, so Rizzo and the Lerners probably thought they had that dominant playoff rotation. I don't think anyone, even those generally skeptical of Gio, would have predicted he would go only 8 innings with a 6.75 ERA in his two starts after a 2.96 ERA in 32 regular starts (201 IP).

No argument from me.  I just would have rather had Freeman hitting bombs for us instead of against us. :)