We’re now past both the 2024 Draft and the 2024 Trade Deadline. Lets summarize the draft results, the trade deadline deals, and then discuss the impact all these new players seem to have on our “top 30” ranks and perhaps on the team in the future.
2024 Draft Results. We signed 20 of our 21 picked players, only missing out on the 20th pick, who seemed to be picked as insurance in case our 2nd rounder Luke Dickerson failed to come to terms. Based on the immediate ranking adjustments, the following 2024 draftees will soon slot into our various top 30s in roughly the following spots:
- 5-7 Range: #1 pick Seaver King, who probably starts at SS and 3B in High-A next year.
- 7-10 Range: #1s pick Caleb Lomavita, who hopefully is catching full time at High-A next year.
- 16-20 Range: #3 pick Kevin Bazzell, who probably gets some C cycles in High-A next year.
- Low 20 range: #2 pick Luke Dickerson, who the Nats seem higher on than others. FCL next year.
- 23-25 Range: #4 Pick Jackson Kent, who should be in the Low-A rotation next year.
- 28-30 Range: #8 pick Sam Peterson, who BA slotted in at #29 right out of the gate. Low-A OF.
So, that’s 6 guys pushing the typical edge of the prospect list downwards. For Baseball America’s immediate impact analysis, the above 6 guys meant that #31-36 became Cruz, Nunez, Baker, Alvarez, Lord, and Brown. To give an idea of how the draft strengthens farm systems.
Expectations out of this lot? I’m hoping King turns into someone who can push Luis Garcia when the time is right and maybe Garcia’s pushing arbitration dollars. I’m hoping one of Lomavita or Bazzell makes a for-real push to the upper minors and bolsters our C depth. I’m hoping we get some found-gold in one or two of the starters we got. But, unlike the last couple of drafts, where our 1st rounder was supposed to be a bonafide future superstar, I’m just not that wow’ed by anyone in our draft this year. Maybe its b/c of the lack of brand name awareness this year. We know the pundits seem to really like this draft, so we just have to be patient.
Then, along came the trade Deadline. The Nats were able to move four of the really obvious guys on the trading block (Harvey, Winker, Thomas, and Floro). An ill-timed blow-up inning seems to have cost the team the shot at trading closer Finnegan, and of course what could have been our best trade chip in Trevor Williams blew any shot at a prospect haul when he strained his flexor tendon two months ago. Other FAs to be who also missed out at netting us prospects; Corbin (ha-ha), Gallo (hurt), and the crew of Robles/Rosario/Barnes/Senzel (all DFA’d/released due to under-performance before they could be flipped). The four guys we did trade netted us the following players (and the rough area the acquisitions will slot in from a prospect perspective):
- 7-9 range: Cayden Wallace, 3B in AA, netted in Harvey trade. Also got the supplemental draft pick that turned into Lomavita
- 15-17 range; Tyler Steward, RHP Starting pitcher in AA, netted in Winker trade.
- 6-8 Range: Alex Clemmey, a 19yr old LHP Starting pitcher in Low-A netted in Thomas trade. High-risk/high-reward prospect.
- 23-25 range: Rafael Ramirez, a 19yr old SS in Low-A, netted in Thomas trade. Another high risk/high-reward.
- Outside top 30: Jose Tena, a 23yr old AAA 2B/3B with some MLB time. At one point he was near the Cleveland top 10, now has dropped back. He has great AAA numbers this year, better than a lot of our middle infield guys. So this isn’t a throw-in. He could legitimately push Vargas as a backup middle infield option.
- Outside top 30: Andres Chapparo, a 25-yr old 1B/3B AAA guy who was a MLFA signing in the off-season. Acquired for Floro. Did we really just trade Floro for a month of a MLFA? I’d like to think we retain some control over Chapparo for more than the rest of 2024. He’s destroying AAA this year and is on his way to hitting 20+ homers for the 3rd straight year in the minors. Listed as 3B, but the guy is 5’11”, 200lbs, which screams out “immobile 1B or DH basher.” Plus we already have House, Kieboom, Dunn and a couple others sharing 3B in AAA.
So, that’s quite a haul. Probably 9-10 guys who will slot into our top 30s at either MLB, BA, or elsewhere picked up in the last month. Four of them project as top 10 guys, really helping to bolster the depth in this system. King remains the highest ranked of any of them, but you have to be excited to see what guys like Clemmey, Wallace, and Dickerson can do.
Expectations here? Well, I like the fact that we got two established AA guys. Last year we acquired a solid AA guy in Herz and now he’s in the majors; we could see the same thing out of Steward or Wallace in a year. I like that we got two AAA talents who can bolster that lineup. And I like the lottery tickets that slot into low-A because why not, and because Cleveland is one of those teams that doesn’t shy away from drafting and developing prep and DSL kids well.
One last tidbit. Our Trade partners this year were … odd. We traded with four teams:
- Kansas City/Harvey: last trade was in 2021, a minor cash deal. Last time we did anything of substance in trade with KC was 2018.
- New York Mets/Winker deal: last move with them was 2018, a minor cash deal. Before that was the random Jerry Blevins deal in 2015, who seemingly got moved because he took the Nats to arbitration over like $200k, beat the team, and was dealt a few weeks later.
- Cleveland/Thomas: last move with them also was 2018, the Yan Gomes deal that turned out a lot better for us than it did them.
- Arizona/Floro: we havn’t traded with Arizona since 2011, nearly the entire Rizzo tenure here.
So, interesting that we traded with teams we havn’t done business with in years. Who are the teams we’ve gone the longest without making a deal with? We havn’t traded with Colorado since 2009 (the Joe Biemel deal), We havn’t done business with Houston since 2007 (and even that was the swap of two minor leaguers), but the most hilarious one? We havn’t traded with Baltimore since 2001.
It’s funny to see names from the past pop up. Andres Chaparro was on my list of Rule 5 prospects a couple of years ago when they took Ward. Unless Nunez, Chaparro has actual prior experience making contact with a baseball.
Why not call up Chaparro right now and give him a look at 3B? Lipscomb is really struggling, and Vargas “slugs” .358. Chaparro is as qualified as Yepez was.
KW
31 Jul 24 at 8:21 am
Calling up Chaparro might not be a bad idea, if only to put him on the 40-man and to retain him/prevent him from hitting MLFA. Is he really a 3b though? He seems like a stocky 1B/DH at best.
Todd Boss
31 Jul 24 at 10:55 am
Great summary. Think the rankings of King and Dickerson are low (i.e., they are higher rated prospects). Can see the upside of Clemmey and Wallace appears to be solid (but maybe injury prone), but King is the superior prospect to both of them. He has all five tools, including power. King was the best hitter in the 2023 Cape League and can play every position (well) except catcher.
Understand the difference of opinion on Dickerson, but like King, Dickerson’s tools are off the charts. Power and speed; elite athlete; as a multi-sport guy, he’s just played less baseball then most highly ranked prospects. Projecing 18 year-olds is always risky, but there’s a lot to like with Dickerson
Pilchard
31 Jul 24 at 11:40 am
I agree that it has been a pretty good month for the system overall, both in the draft and at the deadline. I think we all like the returns that Rizzo got for Harvey, Winker and especially Thomas. I know not everyone agrees but I’m 100% fine with the team keeping Finnegan. Quite simply, our 2025 chances are better with him than without him.
I’d still have rather gotten good value in a trade, but Rizzo set a high price and didn’t fold and there’s longterm value in establishing that credibility. Especially without knowing the specific offers, Rizzo has to have the complete benefit of the doubt on that.
Floro’s deal was the only disappointment. It looks like we lost a game of musical chairs with him. The Carlson story would explain how Rizzo ran out of time, but it doesn’t make any sense that we’d prioritize getting Carlson. It’s not even that his value is out of whack for a good but not elite rental reliever – he’s a fair enough post-prospect reclamation project – it’s that we won’t have the major league playtime available for him to develop here next year. But if we weren’t in on him, then what near-deals kept Rizzo from moving Floro earlier? Maybe he thought he was close to moving Finn too, and was prioritizing pushing him. I don’t know. It’s puzzling, and something better for Floro should have been available, but the bottom line is that it was a pretty good return all around and I don’t think it’s good to focus on the one bad deal.
That said, I’m on the low end of the range for almost all the new guys, and those from the draft too. I’m still thinking through my new ranking, but I have King and Wallace in my “flawed but promising” FV45 tier with Lile, Hassell and Morales, so more like 10th than 7th. And I have Clemmey after those guys, so like 13th, and not ahead of them (which is where I rank Sykora and Susana), though Clemmey could be a fast riser as soon as he shows any further development. Stuart was a good get, but he’s not young for AA and his stuff and results are solid and not better. He’s in the 20s for me. Same with Loma and Bazzell, who seem like fine if flawed prospects, but I’m going to need to see them have some success in pro ball before ranking them higher than, say, Millas.
Finally, I think it’s just bonkers that Kent and Peterson are getting ranked at all. If we traded Lord, a 24 year old with a sub-4 ERA and FIP in AAA, for some other team’s Sam Peterson, I’d be livid.
SMS
31 Jul 24 at 11:45 am
Stuart’s numbers are better than his prospect rankings. He’s been unlucky (.328 BABIP against), confirmed by 3.28 FIP and 3.23 xFIP. He gets Ks and doesn’t have the problem with walks that Parker and Herz did. Stuart is a similar type of prospect, one who gets a lot of Ks without high velo, which keeps him from elevated prospect status. The Nats seem to be finding success with those types of guys.
KW
31 Jul 24 at 12:46 pm
Since the Nats pushed Crews, Morales, and Pinckney all the way up to AA last summer after the draft and started them there this season, I think you’re underselling where they hope that King and Lomavita will be. Law argued recently that with the contracted minors, he doesn’t think that players from top conferences will see pitching comparable or better to what they faced in college until they get to AA. The Nats’ aggressive promotion of their top college draftees, and House and Lile, seems to show that they agree.
KW
31 Jul 24 at 1:07 pm
@KW: agree on Crews/Morales getting pushed … but I think they were better/more mature prospects than the guys i’m mentioning. King played ACC so that’s obviously 2nd best college conference, but Lomavita in Pac12 is a notch below ACC/SEC, and Bazzell (Texas Tech/Big12) , Kent (Arizona/Pac12), all in teh same boat.
Crews= SEC, Morales = Miami/ACC, Pinckney = SEC/Alabama. Slightly different/better college pedigrees.
Todd Boss
31 Jul 24 at 2:41 pm
I would bet that they’re really hoping that King at least can be at AA. At what position I’m not sure. Probably SS for the time being, unless he really shows that he’s not up to it at the pro level.
KW
31 Jul 24 at 3:03 pm
Commenter on Nats Prospects from Harrisburg said that Stuart was “consistently” at 96-97 last night in his debut for the Sens, which is considerably different from the reported 93 or so in the prospect report on him. He’s going to be one to watch.
KW
31 Jul 24 at 7:03 pm
King starting point: remember; they started Crews in low-A. I mean, technically his first pro game was one game in FCL where he went 3-3. but he was in Fredericksburg for three weeks. And you’re not going to find a more complete college bat than Crews.
The rangers, who managed to get langford to the majors faster than anyone, stated him with 3 games in FCL, then he went straight to high-A. which is what I thought they’d do with Crews, but wha tever.
Todd Boss
1 Aug 24 at 10:43 am
I’m talking about King starting at AA by next season. Crews, Morales, and Pinckney all ended the 2023 summer at AA and started there this spring. I’m sure they have similar hopes for King.
KW
1 Aug 24 at 1:03 pm
I took a pass at a top 50. Let me know what you guys think. (I know I’m high on Herz, but I’m just in on him. I can see that he has a decently large bust risk, but I think his 80% percentile outcome is an ace and that has a ton of value. We’ll see, and I guess he graduates off in two weeks anyway.)
FV50 or higher: 1. Wood(FV65) 2. Crews(FV60) 3. House(FV55) 4. Cavalli(FV50)
FV45+: 5. Herz 6. Susana. 7. Sykora
FV45: 8. Lile 9. King 10. Morales 11. Wallace 12. Hassell 13. Clemmey 14. Vaquero
FV40+: 15: Lara 16. Bennett 17. Rutledge 18. Millas 19. Hurtado 20. Feliz
FV40: 21. Tena 22. Lomavita 23. Dickerson 24. Lord 25. Stuart 26. Green 27. Ramirez Jr 28. Grissom Jr 29. Brzykcy 30. Bazzell 31. Pinckney 32. Made 33. Saenz
FV35+: 34. Alvarez 35. N Nunez 36. Sinclair 37. White 38. Quintana 39. Ribalta 40. Schoff 41. Shuman 42. Henry 43. Baker 44. Cronin 45. M Romero 46. Chaparro 47. Cox 48. De La Rosa 49. Kent 50. Tavares
Compared to my preseason list, there are 16 new names. 5 from the draft (counting Loma), 6 from trades (not counting Loma), and 5 development surprises. Cronin and Cox were just outside my list preseason and are still ranked pretty low, but I definitely whiffed on Ribalta and especially Lord. I’m not sure I even considered them. I also had 10 players fall off, not including graduates, with Mota the highest ranked preseason at 30th. 2 of those 10 have since been released (Infante and M Perez) and I wouldn’t be surprised if a couple more are soon, like Pineda and Aldo Ramirez.
SMS
1 Aug 24 at 1:06 pm
Great work SMS. I want to see at least a little bit of minor league performance before trying to rank the new draftees, but I like this list.
Initial thoughts: i’m kind of down on Herz based on his debut as compared to Parker’s … probably not fair. I’m also skeptical of Lile and would have him lower. I remain hopeful for Hassell but understand why some have him dropping. I think Green’s tooks are better than 27; there’s just no way you can put those tools below a kid like Dickerson who’s played cold weather prep ball right now. I like Bazzell a lot and I think he co uld be a sneaky good draftee from this class. No need to split hairs about anyone in the 30s-50, but i do wonder if someone like Nunez is actually a prospect.
Todd Boss
1 Aug 24 at 10:39 pm
Really good list, SMS.
I’m much more down on Cavalli after losing another full season to injury. How long can we rely on a 26 month old scouting report on him? Especially once you compare him to the likes of Herz (or Parker before he graduated), who are at the same level of performance, but 1-2 years younger. I’d bump him down a tier (which seems fair and seems to be what you’ve done with both Bennett and Henry due to their injuries), but understand why people are higher on him. The upside is still there, but his peak years have been decimated due to injury, and we’ve still yet to see him string together more than 2 rehab starts yet without another problem cropping up.
Susana and Sykora might also warrant a bump up, but I do want to see how Sykora fares against better opposition. While, yes, he was drafted out of HS last season, he’s very old considering that (20 and 3 months, just a month younger than Susana who’s in his 3rd professional season). I’m surprised he hasn’t been promoted to Wilmington yet.
I’d also demote Hassell quite a bit. Much like Cavalli, he’s still living off the fumes of a two year old scouting report. While this season was “better”, a line of .278/.369/.369 still isn’t good enough for a corner outfielder. That’s Jacob Young-level hitting without the exceptionally elite defense behind it, nor plus-plus speed (i.e. basically everything that makes Young a valuable player). And now, we’re seeing complications from his hand injury two years ago that has prevented him from playing for two months. That’s highly concerning. Put all those factors together, and I really don’t see how Hassell amounts to anything more than a 4th OF. That’s like a 35+/40FV, which is a bitter pill to swallow, but the other 3 pieces of the Soto trade doing well softens the pain.
Vaquero has been diabolical this season, and not in the good way. While the tools are there, it’s hard to defend him based on the season he’s had. He’s still a whole year younger than Green, but I struggle to see much difference between the two (except Green having far more power projection than Vaquero). I agree with your take on Green, though.
I’m also higher on Millas than you. Millas is your prototypical Rodney Dangerfield “No Respect” prospect. Yes, he’s deep into his 26th year (but that doesn’t seem to have harmed Cavalli much), but any catcher with above average defence, as Millas is reputed to have, and an above average bat is instantly a prospect. We’ve even seen catchers with bad defense and bad bats be rated as overall top 10 prospects (*cough*Keibert*cough*), so it mystifies me why a player like Millas doesn’t get more attention (from both the Nats and prospect watchers).
A couple other names to consider: Dashyll Tejeda (he’s currently outhitting his teammates Feliz and Hurtado by a good margin), probably worth a 35 FV mention. Phillip Glasser, another “no respect” prospect, who’s done nothing but his since signing for a measly $20k. His line of .317/.397/.455 across two levels is nothing to scoff at, plus he can seemingly play every position on the diamond besides C and CF. And lastly, consider Miguel Gomez, who’s had a very good season at an age-appropriate level in A-/+ ball this season with a solid enough track record of success to suggest it’s not a fluke.
Will
2 Aug 24 at 4:49 am
One last point, I’d also agree with Todd on Lile. While it might not mean bumping him down a tier, I’d definitely put him behind some of the other 45s. It’s looking increasingly like the power he flashed in Fredericksburg last season was a fluke, as he hasn’t replicated it at Wilmington or Harrisburg since. And if he can’t hit for more power (he’s hit 6 HR in 131 games above low A ball), he begins to look more and more like Robert Hassell, and associated with all the problems I listed above with regards to him.
Will
2 Aug 24 at 4:54 am
I really appreciate the feedback, and you guys make some good points. Thanks a ton.
Re Herz and Parker – I certainly agree that Parker is the better pitcher right now, and even that if one of our current starters is pushed out of the opening day rotation next year, Herz is most likely to go. But he’s also the most likely (or maybe 2nd after Gore) in the system to win the 2027 Cy Young. Of starers with 40 IP, Herz has the 3rd highest K/9 and the 11th highest K%-BB% in the majors. The top of those lists are mostly aces; the top 15 in the latter stat are: Crochet, Skenes, Flaherty, Sale, Glasnow, Skubal, S Gray, Cease, Pivetta, Ryan, Herz, Lopez, Yamamoto, Bradley, Kirby. Herz obviously isn’t there yet, and very well may never get there, but he can miss bats at an elite rate and that gives him a better chance than almost anyone at being a TOR monster.
Re Injuries in general – If the injury is relatively routine, I actually try not to adjust my ranking at all. But if the injury repeats, or if results or tools suffer after returning, I have a more elastic than usual downside. With Henry, TOS isn’t even routine, and I still had him 20th preseason. He slipped a bit with his erratic rehab, but the real reason I have him so low is that I believe he’s been shifted to the bullpen (last 3 A+ rehab appearances were for 1 IP or less) and this ranking reflects his now capped upside. I actually haven’t dropped Bennett at all (though some folks have shifted around him); I’m just a bit down on him vs consensus because I read his run of dominance in A ball (counting his 3 good starts A+ and ignoring his 3 bad A+ starts as injury related) as expected for a 22 year old with his pedigree. I want to see his repertoire work against hitters in the AA before I move him higher. Will brings up a very interesting point with Cavalli, and maybe he should drop a level – his rehab has been erratic, and you have to elevate his injury bust risk accordingly. Plus, this is costing us a year and a half of team control, and that needs to counted against his potential upside. All the same, I think I’m waiting out the year to see if/how he’s able to finish rehabbing before possibly adjusting him.
Re Lile + Hassell – I agree that they are similar players, though I think Lile is clearly slightly to moderately better when you compare across age and level. Also Lile having been through TJ doesn’t really give me any red flags as hitter, but Hassell’s lasting and recurring wrist issues do. Honestly, I think the median outcome for any of these 45s is a bust, but Hassell and Lile and Wallace are almost good enough to get excited about, and this is where I rank those guys. As they get older and get chances and don’t surprise and their error bars shrink, they’ll fall back a level to where Rutledge and Millas are, and eventually past or off the list. I’m open to the idea that they should be dropped quicker, but sometimes folks do make that surprising step of development, and they’re young enough and close enough that I’m comfortable having them here.
Speaking of Millas, I 100% get why you’re in on him, Will. The tools look very good. Zips likes him. I’ve thought about ranking him higher. But his defense seemed to be more above average than plus during his cups of coffee. And, while above average is a lot better than Ruiz or Adams, it’s not going to suffice as a carrying tool. Hopefully he gets some playing time and shows well during Ruiz’s IL stint, but I think he’s trending down as of now and would not be shocked to see him squeezed off the roster this offseason. The team seems really skeptical of his bat, and they have a lot of information that we don’t have access to. (Though to be fair, I also won’t be shocked if after we cut him, he goes on to a 10 WAR career somewhere else – so maybe he should be a few slots higher.)
Re Vaquero + Green – I basically give the tools a year’s grace, which is why Vaquero has slid back but not dropped a level while Green has slipped prodigiously. If Vaquero isn’t better when he repeats A next year, he’ll fall for me in the same way. Also, Green has been on something of a tear the last month or so, but I don’t really care if his wRC+ in low-A is 160 or 130 or 100. I just want him to reduce his strikeouts. He’s finally down to just under 40% over the last 5 weeks, which is something, and if he gets that under 35% for a stretch to end the season, I’ll probably have to move him back up somewhat. The tools are very very loud, but he’s also almost uniquely bad at the single stat most predictive of future ML success for an A-ball hitter, and that needs to improve for him to remain a prospect regardless of his other successes and failures.
Re Nunez and the fringe – I don’t consider the non-reliever 35+s really prospects at all. They’re almost-prospects who need to take a development step forward to become prospects. I’m open to the idea that the ones with down or flat trendlines, like Nunez and De La Rosa and Baker, don’t really belong on these lists, especially if they’ve already had some chances. And if you’d rather drop them and add in Glasser or Tejada, I can get behind that. Those were my last two not to make it, by the way. Just figured that given Glasser’s age and both of their lack of scouting pedigree, I wanted to see performance one level higher before I really believe the statlines. But I certainly get it if you’re in on them already. Gomez hasn’t been on my radar. I find it hard to scout relievers because they pitch so few innings, and I usually only track guys in the upper minors or who have prospect buzz. But he looks good and I’ll add him to my watchlist.
Finally, on the draftees – man, I just don’t know. I don’t watch amateur baseball and wouldn’t trust myself to project future tools on these kids even if I did. Full season stats have small sample sizes, are against weirdly variable opposition and mostly use metal bats. The wood bat stats are based on even smaller showcases. I saw Pipeline raving about one of our kids, I think King, having some otherwordly triple slash on the Cape and it was based on 17 games. 17 games! This is baseball. Juan Yepez is a hall of famer after 17 games. I don’t pretend to have one iota of independent insight on any of the draftees. I parsed the public scouting reports and did my best. I agree with Todd that we’ll know more after we see these guys for a few months in the minors, but I had to put them somewhere.
Thanks again for the responses. I really enjoy kicking around these ideas.
SMS
2 Aug 24 at 2:38 pm
@sms; on rankings … i’m resisting re-doing the top50 that I did in the off-season simply because … it’d be a ton of work that basically never ends. I can’t wait to re-do it next off-season though.
I understand why BA, mlb, etc just do partial re-issues of rankings mid-season.
Todd Boss
2 Aug 24 at 3:03 pm
Ha, fair enough. And really the ordinal ranking doesn’t matter except in that it forces you to balance the various factors when you come up with your valuations.
But thinking through these questions, whether or not there’s an actual ranking at the end of it, is a large part of what I enjoy about following the Nat’s minor league system. So I’m going to keep at it, Sisiphyan task or no.
SMS
2 Aug 24 at 4:25 pm