The Nationals have agreed to a one-year contract with Steve Cishek, reports Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic. The contract comes with a $1.75MM guarantee, along with $500K in performance bonuses, per Mark Feinsand of MLB.com.
Signing a veteran like Cishek, who will turn 36 in June, is a fairly logical move for a club that underwent a massive fire sale at last year’s deadline. While the headliners of that selloff were Max Scherzer and Trea Turner, the bullpen also took a hit with the deals of Daniel Hudson and Brad Hand. That left the club with a reliever corps that largely consisted of unproven players with limited big league experience, with the exception of Will Harris. However, Harris turns 38 in August and only threw six innings last year before surgery for thoracic outlet syndrome ended his season, making him a question mark in his own right.
In contrast to that lack of reliability, Cishek has been remarkably consistent in his career. In each season since 2011, he has thrown at least 44 innings, with the exception of the shortened 2020 season, where he still logged 20 frames. Since his debut in 2010, he’s appeared in a total of 668 games, notching 644 1/3 innings with an ERA of 2.85, strikeout rate of 24.7%, walk rate of 9.6% and groundball rate of 49%. With the exception of 2020, he’s never had an ERA higher than 3.58 in a season.
Last year, Cishek signed a one-year deal with the Angels late in March for a salary of $1MM. He ended up making 74 appearances for the Halos, logging 68 1/3 innings with an ERA of 3.42, strikeout rate of 20.8% and walk rate of 13.3%. That walk rate was the worst of his career, and the strikeout rate just a hair above his previous career lows. That could perhaps be cause for some concern, but the Nationals still game him a modest raise on last year’s salary.
For a team that wiped millions from its books at the trade deadline last year, it’s still an incredible modest sum with little downside. If Cishek has yet another season like he’s had for the majority of his career, he could act as a stabilizing force on a pitching staff with high variance and perhaps be dealt to a contender at the deadline, as the team looks to bolster its farm and reload for their next competitive window.
Why? We had him in Seattle. It wasn’t good. I liked him pitching against us though. Lol
Liked him period. Solid since his days as a marlin and of overuse back then. Can go out day after day and be effective.
I remember one game, I think the Mariners were playing the Cubs, and he threw a wild pitch which cost the M’s the game. I saw it coming a mile away and I couldn’t stand watching him after that.
Yes and I remember Mitch Williams gave up a home run In The World Series. I still liked him and it was an important game. Don’t remember the last 20 years the Mariners playing a game with any meaning.
You don’t even like baseball, do you?
Yawn
Blockbuster!
Not a bad pick-up. Cishek’s lowest ERA+ in his career has been 109 back in 2015 unless you want to count the small 20 IP sample from 2020. But based on the fact he had a 3.14 ERA from August 10th onward that year, I think it’s safe to say it was a fluke.
Angel fans’ long national nightmare is over. Cishek is solid in blow outs, and when starting with bases empty. Joe Maddon would bring him in with runners on in close games because of his GB %. However he allowed almost 50% of inherited runners to score. It was brutal.
Joe Maddon has the worst handle on when to pull a starter and who to bring in from the bullpen I’ve ever seen in 55 + plus years of watching bb.
Maddon might be, but he really never had any setup men in Chicago or Anaheim.
I bet if you give him weapons, he’ll do just fine.
I have always thought he was overrated. He was lucky to win with the Cubs.
The way he managed in the 2016 world series had me literally pulling my hair out! He’s very good dealing with players and getting guys to pull together, but his strategy is not the best. But there are plenty of managers like that.
Scioscia was worse in my opinion, but Maddon did serve under him as the bench coach for a long time…
There will be a lot of comments saying how terrible this is, but the Nats are likely to fill up on lottery tickets. If several hit, it could be an interesting season. Most likely some could be good enough to trade at the deadline as the team works its way back into contention. There is reason to trust Mike Rizzo, given how solid the team was from 2012 to 2019, winning the World Series that has eluded so many other teams for so long.
I still think the best way to stay competitive for several years for the next contending window would be to trade Juan Soto. As for trusting Mike Rizzo, how many crappy managers has he hired? Davey and Matt followed by Johnnie.
How bad is Davey Martinez though?
Pretty inexpensive deal for a proven, unselfish, reliable, experienced bullpen arm.
Chisek was one of the relievers I was keeping an eye on. Yanks have a very deep ‘pen. But an extreme slider guy or sidearmer would probably be a useful counterpoint to all our lefty arms & RH power relief pitchers. Still some guys like that laying around in free agency though.
Although I’m sure that’s a very low priority.
He’s fine, as long as you never bring him in with men on base.
I know better than to disagree with you in re Angels relievers, Halo. I made that mistake last winter & was shown to be completely wrong.
But. I am looking at him (or other similar pitchers) for a fairly specific, compressed, matchup minor role. Somewhere in that 6th-8th reliever mix in the Yanks ‘pen.
I had no problem with him getting three out. He did quite well. But if there were men on base while he was trying to get those three outs, other pitchers ERA suffered.
Doesn’t necessarily sound like a good matchup guy.
You are right. As a Cubs fan I disliked him cuz he would be fine when starting an inning – giving him generally solid ERAs – but was unreliable with men on base.
Good luck, man! You still got it, let’s goooo
As a mariner fan , I remember how I hated when I heard shitshack was coming in
Yes the Nationals dealt Hudson, Hand at others last year’s deadline. But they were rentals and the Nats would have needed to add bullpen arms this season regardless.
We called him IRS. Inherited Runs Scored and also as dependable as the IRS. He was there to collect runs for the other team.
Most pitchers do better with the bases clear tbf.
So where does Kenley Jansen land? I still say the most logical fit is Toronto.
I guess any team that needs a closer.
Steve gave my kid a ball. Will love him forever. Good luck Steve!!
I have never found ERA to be a fair determiner of performance for a relief pitcher. Too few innings for that to matter much. A couple really bad outings can skew an entire season. That, plus the whole inherited runner thing.
My first thought was that the Nats have needed multiple relievers like Cishek (reliable guys to cover the 6th or 7th inning after the starter comes out) for about a decade and they decide to make that sort of move when they are in a mini-rebuild instead of when they had World Series hopes each offseason. For so long they’ve had a guy capable of closing out a game going back to Papelbon yet they never had the arms to get from the starter to that guy on a consistent basis.
No, go back to the AL West!!
Cishek. Going back by the Cishore.
Saved that V by getting the c-see-Sion
What’s with all of the d-bags and the stupid comments? We went 3 months with nothing and now that there’s real news, you’re still not happy? Maybe just stop following altogether then.
Cishek is a guy who Rizzo has had an eye on for years. Considering the weakness of the Nats BP, he should be a big improvement even if he does have issues with allowing runners in scoring position to score. He also could be a candidate for flipping for prospects at the trade deadline. Seems like a solid pick up for the Nats.
Cishek for prospects? You’re joking right?
If Rizzo watched any Angel games last year he wouldn’t of signed this guy.
I hated seeing him trot in from the bullpen.
He would clear the bases within 3 pitches. Thank God the Angels didn’t try to retain him.
Since you’re a negative fellow, I will point out that it’s “wouldn’t have” not “wouldn’t of”. Have a lovely day.
Sorry for being honest. JB