The Nationals lost 91 games in 2024 but entered this winter with an arrow that was seemingly pointed upwards. Key young players like CJ Abrams and MacKenzie Gore took steps forward, while others like James Wood and Dylan Crews made their big league debuts. Between those positive signs for the future and the onerous Patrick Corbin contract finally coming off the club’s books, it was widely speculated around baseball that the Nationals could be a player in the upper echelons of free agency for the first time since their rebuild began in 2021. They instead opted for a much more reserved approach in free agency.
Fan speculation that the club could attempt to enter the Juan Soto bidding to pair their former superstar with the package of youngsters they acquired for him back in 2022 was always farfetched, but the club’s passive winter went beyond not taking a swing at free agency’s top dog. Rather than pursue a big bat at first base like Pete Alonso, GM Mike Rizzo and his front office swung a trade for Nathaniel Lowe and signed Josh Bell. Alex Bregman would’ve made plenty of sense as an addition at third base, but the club opted to take low-cost fliers on Paul DeJong and Amed Rosario instead.
That measured approach to upgrading the lineup carried over to the pitching staff as well. The Nats didn’t appear interested in a mid-rotation veteran like Nick Pivetta or a potential ace like Jack Flaherty who could lead the pitching staff, even when both lingered on the market into February. They settled on depth options like Michael Soroka and Shinnosuke Ogasawara behind their stable of young arms. Even pricey one-year relief arms like Kenley Jansen and Jose Leclerc signed by other clubs looking to take a step forward toward contention were eschewed in favor of non-tendering and then re-signing Kyle Finnegan.
None of those depth moves were necessarily bad on paper, and some of them have worked out so far. Finnegan has looked good in his return to the club’s closer role to this point. It’s hard to argue with Lowe’s .250/.339/.500 slash line as a massive upgrade over what Joey Meneses and Joey Gallo offered D.C. last year. Rosario has looked solid in the utility role he found some success in with the Rays last year. Despite those early successes, the club’s mostly passive offseason frustrated some fans in the nation’s capital. The Nats are just 6-9 to this point in the year and stand little hope of overcoming titanic teams like the Mets and Phillies as presently constructed.
Of course, that well may have been true even if the team had splurged on higher-profile free agents. The Phillies have been one of the NL’s biggest juggernauts for years now and show little sign of slowing down. The Mets added Soto to a team that already made the NLCS. Even with a shocking 4-11 start in Atlanta opening the door to contention a bit more for the Nationals, they’d have a steep hill to climb to get back to the postseason this year. Club owner Mark Lerner suggested to Barry Svrluga of the Washington Post back in February that the gap between where the Nationals stood entering the winter and the league’s playoff-caliber clubs was too big to justify a significant outlay.
“When Mike calls me in and says, ‘We really need to think about it,’ for next winter, we’ll talk about it,” Lerner told Svrluga. “Right now, he doesn’t think — and I agree with him: There’s no point in getting a superstar and paying him hundreds of millions of dollars to win two or three more games.”
Lerner went on to highlight the club’s decision to sign Jayson Werth to a seven-year, $126MM deal prior to the 2011 season, suggesting that they signed Werth when the club was “right on the cusp” of finding success. That comparison is a somewhat questionable one, however. The 2010 Nationals actually posted a worse record than the 2024 club, losing 93 games, and the Nats finished with a lackluster 80-81 record in Werth’s first year in D.C. before taking off in 2012 thanks in part to the arrival of Bryce Harper.
By contrast, players like Wood, Gore and Abrams are already in place with the club and finding success in the majors. Slow starts this year for Crews and Luis Garcia Jr. highlight the inconsistencies that come with a team built around young talent, but proven veterans would help to paper over those struggles and create a more well-balanced roster. Perhaps that wouldn’t be enough to get the Nationals back to the postseason this year, but a record better than the one the team produced back in 2011 would’ve been within reach. A win total in the low-to-mid 80s can even be enough to squeak into the playoffs in the era of 12 playoff teams, as demonstrated by clubs like the Marlins, Royals, and Tigers in recent years.
What do MLBTR readers think about the Nationals’ decision to hold off on ramping spending back up? Should they have moved more aggressively to exit their rebuilding phase this winter, or were they wise to wait for their young players to develop more before committing to a win-now approach? Have your say in the poll below:
Odd question and timing.
Deedsy loves his polls…
At least wait until Rosario’s average drops below .300 before questioning him.
Nats should have just massively over paid for big names who didn’t want to play for them.
These are businesses. We fans tend to think of our hometown teams as something like “Public Trusts” but the only “Public” in them is whatever the taxpayer is willing to fork over. If this team, as constituted, manages to win 83 games, the fans will have a legitimate beef. If it doesn’t, don’t expect owners to reduce there profitability just to show the fans it’s trying. ROI is what motivates many owners.
And owners only spend what they can, not out of their own pocket for the love of the game. Seidler and Illitch were a different breed, cared a lot about the fans and the team.
Like when everyone in Pittsburgh says Nutting should sell, another owner won’t make it better unless they get a better tv deal, much higher attendance, or more revenue sharing.
Or they get another seidler
Spend what they can? They’re billionaires. The hey could spend more, but it’s a cost benefit analysis. They’ll do what benefits their bottom line, and little to nothing more. Americans would do well to understand this one thing. Billionaires don’t care about anything but money.
Cuban cared about the Mavs. Maybe, too much.
The hey could spend more, but it’s a cost benefit analysis. They’ll do what benefits their bottom line, and little to nothing more. Americans would do well to understand this one thing.
=========================
Like the other 8,000,000,000 people in the world.
Seidler “cared” after the cancer diagnosis.
The ROI is when you sell the team. The best way to get the biggest ROI is having a good team every year.
The Nats spent over $50 million on the payroll and cleared a lot of bad payroll like Patrick Corbin and Joey Gallo and others. To me, the issue was how they spent it. I guess the good news is they get another bite at the apple in 7 months to do it again in a better free agent pool.
that poll question is confusing plz fix
In a division where the Mets, Phillies, and Braves all have/had legitimate World Series hopes, waiting another year isn’t the worst thing. They could all get old in the next couple of years and then it will be their time.
You do realize you can be consistently good and don’t need to throw away any season.
The fact that only like 3-4 teams have been able to do that for ~5+ years shows it’s an incredibly hard thing to do. I wouldn’t like their chances in that division this year, even with a couple big additions.
Shouldn’t every teams goal to be one of those top teams? I’m not saying they need to go World Series or bust but there’s no reason for every team to bring in a couple players to get fans to come to games. Winning 85 games is attainable for the team and 85 makes you competitive for the playoffs.
I don’t disagree. But most teams are going to play the odds. They’d rather be conservative than risk committing multiple years and losing millions to free agents on a team that has a small chance at competing. If I had the funds to own a team I’d donate a lot to free agents lol. The cost of being an optimist.
Shouldn’t every teams goal to be one of those top teams?
============================
It’s a noble cause, but not everyone can do so. Most teams need to pick and choose their battles. If the mid-tier and below teams try to be one of the top teams every year, they are likely to never be a top team.
No but they can make their teams competitive for wild card spots which draw in fans. The business is about making money and you only do that by drawing in more fans.
Funny how the Braves know that but the Nats don’t. The Nats are cheap. That’s all there is to it.
I think the Nats have done their rebuild nearly flawlessly. They weren’t going to contend this year no matter what they did in the offseason. The next free agent class is loaded with pitching so I’d expect them to be more aggressive. If all goes well they could be a postseason contender in 2026
Ronk325;
The Nationals under Rizzo – and I like him – have had a history of being awful working with pitchers…….through multiple pitching coaches.
Yes, they signed Max. He was one of the best FA signings in history. But Max knew what he wanted to do. They also signed Corbin and quickly ran him into the ground. They don’t develop many pitchers they drafted or traded for when those pitchers were prospects, and they forever are trading for relief pitchers late in the season…..while developing a ML bullpen is the easiest thing a teams pitching coaches do.
I wrote this offseason that their heralded rebuild wasn’t going to go anywhere , because they don’t have the pitching to play in a division with the Mets, Braves, and Phillies….and soon to be Marlins.
Pitching is the name of the game. Defense supports it. Everyone that has ever had anything to do with the sport – except those that think major league baseball is the same as rotisserie league – knows it.
They should get an established front end SP from the Cease, King, Valdez, and Gallen group next offseason. Gore is a talented pitcher who would slot nicely as a 2 or 3 in most rotations. They also have a pair of intriguing pitching prospects in Sykora and Clemmey. I’d actually say offense is becoming far more important in today’s game, especially in the postseason. The Nats should have plenty of that once all the kids get their feet wet.
The Phillies are an aging team with a closing window. Cracks are starting to form in the Braves. I’m not entirely sold on the Mets long term outlook. The Marlins are still in the early stages of a full scale rebuild. The Nats could be a contender to win the NL East as early as 2027
I understand your logic……
The other NL East teams are really not that good, and their FO’s and owners are just going to let their rosters wither away while the Nationals sign a few (currently) name pitchers that magically take them to the promised land in 2 years.
I grew up watching a team that lost for over a decade. Every single year people were writing how they were going to “surprise a lot of people” and would be very good in a year or two….if they just sign a free agent or two and some of the other guys develop. Well they did sign FA’s and a few of those guys did develop…..but not most…..while most of the players they had got worse.
I keep writing: Teams that win are those that make the players they have under contract (major and minor leagues) better. The Nationals have no track record of doing that with pitchers, and are pretty much average with position players.
What you rotisserie league guys are missing is that the quality free agent players and their agents scrutinize to identify the franchises that make players better. And those that have the option to sign with one, do. Those that are not that well regarded sign with whoever will pay them. In short, what goes around comes around.
When the Nationals build a record of making pitchers better, then the better FA pitchers will be open to signing with them.
Don’t forget Jarlin Susana, who overhauled his entire delivery, leading to a drastic improvement in his walk rates. He’s another potential impact starter
The Phillies spend almost as much as anyone and are strong contenders for Kyle Tucker next season so I do think they are sustainable right now
the braves have a technical problem that we don’t know but it can probably be fixed, just like the Philadelphia eagles
Mets are suspect but they can sign and trade for anyone
Marlins are never going to contend, even so the nationals have to deal with 3 powerhouse teams
The Phillies didn’t spend this offseason and have an aging core. At this point they’re merely trying to supplement the current roster and build up the farm system. I could see them or the Braves sliding down the standings, but Atlanta has consistently shown the ability to develop piles of young pitching.
Nothing against Dombrowski, but I consider more of a great finisher than all around visionary. We’re already seeing Miami and Washington creep up on the rest of the division on the strength of intelligently executed rebuilds. That’s only going to continue.
The 2019 WS winning team was largely homegrown outside of Scherzer and to a lesser extent Corbin. They currently have an impressive group of young position players in Wood, Abrams, and Crews plus the top pick in the upcoming draft that will probably land them Ethan Holliday. Free agents chase the money more often than not and the Nats have plenty of it to spend. I suspect they will be able to plug their holes and become competitive in short order
Susana looks nasty but probably still winds up in the bullpen. That’s not necessarily a bad thing though because he has the stuff to be an elite closer
The Phillies already have $176MM on the books for next year before factoring in arbitration salaries and possibly re-signing Schwarber and Realmuto. Their lineup is already a bit lefty heavy as well. I don’t see them being players for Tucker
Winning teams spend money. It is ever thus. And the Nats are cheap.
I generally agree. I think they’ve rebuilt very well. Could have perhaps added another name this offseason, but ultimately, the timeline feels prudent.
The best time to try to win, as it has always been, is right now.
So do you bring in your closer down by 6 runs, because you want to win “right now”?
No but you don’t hold your closer back in a game you are in because you might need him tomorrow.
Right, so you try to win when the timing is right. The best time to try is not necessarily “right now”.
Troy Percival’s iPad;
EXACTOMUNGO!
Read how the Royals changed their pitching philosophy before the 2024 season and how that worked out for them.
Small market teams such as the Rays, Brewers, and Guardians have competed for years by setting themselves up and using that philosophy (the Royals broadcaster recently noted that the Guardians were out of the playoff race a cumulative total of 20-something regular season games over the past 7-8 years). Sometimes those teams have to step back for a year, but then they hop right back in it. The Marlins and Reds are about to do the same. Meanwhile, teams like the A’s, Pirates, White Sox, Twins, Rockies and others are in some sort of a rebuild most of the time. It might be possible that the Angels have learned their lesson.
Just wait until the work stoppage. Let the Dodgers take every player they want….until the salary cap makes that impossible.
“The sky is falling, the sky is falling!”
I would trade a season of not watching my mariners miss the playoffs by one game if we can put in a cap
But there are too many old people that don’t want to change for a cap and the MLBPA would never agree to that
A cap is the one thing the players will never agree to. They would sacrifice season(s) before agreeing to it. Not saying they are right or wrong.
There will never be a salary cap.
The headline question and the survey question are worded too differently – if you read the headline and think “Yes” (which I did), you come down to the poll, and you’d actually need to answer “No.”
The rebuild has failed. It’s not the players on the roster that should be examined. The front office has saddled itself with contracts for Corbin, Strasburg, and Scherzer in recent years, two of which they’re still paying, and gotten little in trade results.
Way to conflate two separate issues.
The new core has been steadily coming into focus since the second half of 2023. In fact, they won a series against a then red hot Dodgers team last week. If that isn’t progress then what is?
Strasburg and Scherzer were also integral pieces of their championship team in 2019. Even after factoring the dead money and this past offseason’s outlays they have a ton of payroll flexibility as this year’s expenditure is just under $115 million.
IMO, this team is going to be a major threat to the Phillies and Mets in 2026 and beyond
Scherzer contract was a absolute bargain.
Why is this question being asked 16 games into the season? At this early juncture, who’s to say the Nats will make or not make the playoffs?
Correction: 15 games.
And it isn’t about next offseason or this offseason being “tHe RiGhT TiMe” there is no Juan Soto/Corbin Burnes/Max Fried next offseason.
Kyle Tucker MAYBE if he runs away with a Unanimous MVP.
Why are you assuming the 2025 Nats won’t win? In 2019, they started 19-32. You know how that season ended, right?
In todays game the nationals have no chance at Tucker
I’m telling you for Tucker the only contenders are dodgers Phillies Mets and Yankees (and Cubs are a huge IF)
That’s about right. Maybe Giants.
Realistically, there was very little else the Nationals could have done without blocking a prospect.
Nathaniel Lowe was acquired because they lack a clear answer at first in the majors and minors. Ogasawara and Soroka were signed as both rotation depth and potential bullpen pieces. Perhaps they could have gotten a better backup catcher or relief arm but it’s highly unlikely they would be the difference between making and missing the playoffs.
A best case scenario for 2025 is a strong third place finish in that secures the final wildcard spot. If the team returns to contention in 2026 and beyond it will be because the youngsters won starting jobs outright.
They could have gone all in on a long term contract with Alex Bregman. But they have a couple of legitimate 3B prospects reaching the upper minors. They now have another year to evaluate and see if anyone takes a next step. Plus Bregman may very well be available again this offseason, without the QO penalty.
Then Bregman wasn’t a viable option since we both agree he would have blocked prospects like House. At the very least the team wants a longer look at Jose Tena. If they aren’t contending at the deadline, they should have no trouble unloading DeJong or Rosario on their current deals (assuming they produce).
Here’s hoping that, even if Brady House isn’t the next Alex Bregman, that he’s not the next Carter Kieboom either. In any case, I agree they made the right call not pursuing Bregman this offseason – and there really wasn’t much else in the 3B free agent market that was much better than where they landed with DeJong and Rosario.
Bregman poor buy. Give that $ to Woods. Or a pitcher.
At this stage, the top 50 draft pick they would lose for signing most of these guys was more valuable to them.
I think the Nationals made the right moves this year, BUT they have to follow it up with some spending. Extend two or three of their young players, give out a pair of 6/175 or 5/130 free agent contracts this winter, and do a couple of 3-for-2 trades to improve the floor of their 26-man roster.
I liked their bats moves. If they needed pitching it was a great year so should have signed one.
I wouldn’t wish Bregman Alonso on anyone. They wanted to go to certain team teams so no use drastically over paying them.
They had almost no shot of finishing better than 4th, so no, they shouldn’t have made any huge investments.
But that said, they could’ve invested in some better BP arms, without harming their future, probably had a better record, and might’ve landed some trade chips.
They remind me of the 2013-2014 Cubs who were “fun bad” but all we cared about was how the young high draft picks were progressing. Except I can’t watch the Nats because MLB thinks MASN comes to North Carolina and blacks us out on MLB TV.
Why is it the Braves always have enough money to sign players that will help them right away, but the Nats don’t? Answer: The Nats are cheap. Year in and year out, they refuse to spend to put a highly competitive team on the field. They desperately needed another outfield bat this year, but they sat on their hands. Josh Bell is a nice guy. He is not the banger they needed, but he comes cheap. Ditto Rosario. Ditto DeJong. Their bargain-basement approach sucks. Even Lowe, a very good player, may not supply the thump they need. And the BP always sucks under Rizzo. As of this writing, they are 9-13, and already 6 games behind the Mets.
We don’t know whether there were many other higher end FA’s who the Nats pursued only to be turned down. But I think their offseason acquisitions were a mixed bag and they could have and should have done better.
Lowe, Finnegan and Williams were acceptable, but Soroka and Bell were big gambles. Rosario was a weird choice, Their youthful players and prospects are the heart of the team’s return to competitiveness. Yet they could also benefit from the leadership of proven veterans, who could also take a little pressure off of them.
Finally, it’s never really clear exactly what ownership is up (I suspect even amongst themselves). Mark Lerner rarely communicates and when he does, his statements don’t always add up, especially in light of other, prior signals from the front office.
I’m a Nats fan since 2005. I was hoping to see the Nats add some veteran help for this season. During the offseason I began to ponder who would really help the Nats both long term and short term. Bregman would have blocked House or King at third. Alonso needed to be better in the field. Walker would have been nice. There wasn’t really another position player except some veteran backup catchers who would have fit in. But I really wanted to see the Nats spend on the bullpen. Instead they brought in more bounce back types. A frontline starter would have been great. I did notice that over and over again the best free agents wanted to go to a club with a consistent commitment to winning every season. That had to work against the Nats. Now we watch and let the kids play, at least until next offseason.
House stinks, Bregman would not have blocked anyone.
This wasn’t the off-season for the Nats to spend. I’m not sure next winter is either but they will be closer to contention
The nationals only valid excuse to not spending this off-season is that they are in the NL East, which does make sense since money wouldn’t put them above the braves and Mets and Phillies
Even so, a max fried would’ve helped, and the rangers had spent a season where they signed seager and semien and miss the playoffs in 22
Flawed Poll article headline and Poll…
I read the headline and thought YES would be my response to the Poll headline for the article would correlate to the actual poll, but the poll flipped the question, so I voted the opposite of what I intended to do.
This is a lot of “ink” to say the professional prognosticators aren’t worth listening to and to shift the blame for the belief that they were going to spend on to the fans
I thought they should have been in on Bergman long term and offered an overpay to get him. Same for Burnes. They had nobody on the roster who couldn’t move for those guys.
They’re also pieces away, especially in the rotation, and waiting on the farm system while the service clock ticks on Boras clients they’ve been using just to get through seasons is not the answer.
Looking at the free agent market for the 2025 winter it makes sense to wait and see their young core develope or not.
Should have grabbed David Robertson at a minimum.
I chose yes. The Nationals’ cautious approach this offseason was defensible but only if they treat it as the final “wait-and-see” year. Otherwise, they risk repeating the same cycle of mediocrity while other teams blow past them. In today’s expanded playoff era, playing for 83-85 wins can be enough.
Guardians fan here, who likes Nate Lowe much better than Carlos Santana. His ability to hit RHP makes more sense on a team starved for it. He’s good for two years, didn’t cost much. The Nationals did fine, the Guardians not so much.
i think that comparison with werth is quite a stretch, that signing was to generate excitement and good will with the fans, they had been in DC for going into the 7th season and were terrible every year, they needed a big signing at the time regardless of contention status, for example at the time I lived about an hour outside DC, my friend had been a Phillies fan until the nats came to the area, he loved the NL style baseball hated the O’s, he was slowing becoming a bigger nats fan since he could watch every game etc., his favorite player was werth, so when the nats got him he totally switched allegiances, full blown nats guy now,
having said that I think they should wait to see what they have at least, where best to allocate their money, which guys aren’t going to be good enough, which will, and fill in or upgrade where needed, I think teams get into bad contracts by not knowing what they actually need, and signing guys they don’t need or don’t end up fulfilling at that value, just yesterday I read that article about Bryant being put on IL again, that is such a sad situation, but at the end of the day, he has definitely not lived up to it
With a potential lockout 20 months away signing an FA means possibly losing their entire 2027 season but contractually still owing them. Better to lock-up young homegrown talent (who are also worried and eager to sign contracts)