Nationals Arm Race

"… the reason you win or lose is darn near always the same – pitching.” — Earl Weaver

MLFA Carnage in the Nats Farm System

23 comments

Kieboom set to leave the org as a 6year MLFA after hitting a AAA ceiling. Photo via Federal Baseball

A critical day in the off-season calendar of baseball every year happened earlier this week; five days after the end of the World Series (11/4/24) all “6-year minor league free agents” get cut loose. The Universal Player Contracts (UPCs) that players sign upon turning pro allow for six “renewals” before players must be either put on the 40-man roster or are declared free agents. This means that every player who:

  • was Drafted in 2018 or before
  • was an IFA signing in 2018 or before
  • was a 2024 MLFA signing
  • … and who didn’t sign a multi-year deal of some sort already this off-season or earlier this year

Is now a free agent.

Baseball America posted its list for all 30 teams here, but it’s missing a few names for our system. The Big Board for 2025 is now updated with all MLFA’s removed and put onto the 2025 Release tab.

I count 27 players cut loose, including these notable names to long-time Nats farm watchers:

  • Technically Meneses and Rucker were on the 40-man, were outrighted, and by virtue of their signing dates were immediately declared MLFAs.
  • Reid Schaller: 3rd round pick who just never was healthy. Had higher hopes for this guy.
  • Tim Cate: 2nd rounder who spent time on the 40-man but just couldn’t solve AAA.
  • Mason Denaburg: 1st rounder and one of our team’s biggest 1st round busts in terms of accomplishments. Stuck around for years after he should have been cut loose based on performance in a blatant example of the team not wanting to “waste” its signing bonus.
  • Carter Kieboom: 1st round pick, former top 20 prospect in all of baseball, who mystified the industry by not being able to convert fantastic batted-ball skills in AAA to the majors.
  • Israel Pineda; long considered an heir apparent catching prospect but who ended up bouncing around the minor leagues in 2024.
  • Trey Harris, trade bounty for Ehire Adrianza in 2022 but who never really did much for us.
  • Aldo Ramirez, trade bounty for Kyle Schwarber in 2021 and who was supposed to be a decent SP prospect. Blew out his arm, missed two years, never really pitched again. Too bad; Schwarber was a solid trade prospect and should have fetched something of value for us longer term.
  • Rodney Theophile, who looks like he could be a promising SP prospect (2.33 ERA in 9 AA starts to close out 2024). Surprised the team didn’t try to resign him before hitting MLFA.

As far as I can tell, the team has already done some re-signing of a few of its MLFAs; the following should be listed as FAs based on their draft/signing status but are still listed as active:

  • Daison Acosta: AAA Middle Reliever, a 2023 minor league rule-5 pickup but a 2016 IFA signing initially
  • Erick Mejia, AAA utility infielder, who was a 2022 MLFA signing/2012 IFA signing.
  • Viandel Pena High-A backup SS, a 2017 IFA signing but who is just 23.
  • Bryan Caceres, High-A starter who was a 2017 IFA signing out of Panama
  • Yoander Rivero, High-A backup middle infielder, also a 2017 IFA signing.
  • Jose Colmenares, Low-A backup Catcher (2018 IFA)
  • Jeremy De La Rosa, just promoted AA outfielder (2018 IFA)
  • Jose Atencio, High-A starter (2018 IFA)
  • Joan Otanez, Low-A middle reliever and 2018 IFA
  • Bryan Sanchez, also a Low-A middle reliever and 2018 IFA
  • Samuel Vasquez, High-A middle reliever and 2023 rule-5 guy
  • Kevin Dowdel, a 2024MLFA but a 2023NDFA so he probably falls under the UPC for a while despite being a MLFA.

I’m not a complete expert on the new Collective Bargaining Agreement, but I do find it interesting that many of these are 2018 IFAs: is there an additional year offered to these players b/c of Covid? Do they get an extra year of control b/c they were so young when they signed? Did all these 2018 IFAs not eve play in 2018 so therefore their UPC renewals started in 2019?

Furthermore, two minor league rule-5 guys seemingly should have been cut loose but who are still present; is there a different guideline for rule-5 pickups? Nonetheless, even if all of these players just simply signed new deals to stay with the club one more year, there’s definitely a few that i’m glad are still here. Acosta could be a decent lefty option for the MLB pen, De La Rosa was once a higher ranked prospect who is at least in AA, and Atencio was a very solid starter in Wilmington and i’d like to see where he goes.

The system/big board now shows 147 players under contract in the Minor leagues, including a complete gutting of the AAA pitching staff. Just five arms sit on the AAA roster right now; the rest were 40-man backups for MLFAs. We only have 11 relievers in total on the 40-man right now, which implies to me that we’ll be signing a slew of veteran relievers this off-season, and that we’ll have a cattle-call of 1yr/MLFA/NRIs this coming spring to make up the bulk of the AAA staff.

Written by Todd Boss

November 7th, 2024 at 10:21 am

23 Responses to 'MLFA Carnage in the Nats Farm System'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'MLFA Carnage in the Nats Farm System'.

  1. If I remember correctly, Schwarber was injured at the time of trade, so I don’t think the Ramirez bust is a fair hit against Rizzo. I’m sure he did the best he could given the offers available.

    One other wrinkle I’m wondering about is whether AFL guys get a postponement. Unless Solesky signed a multi-year deal, he’s definitely a FA this offseason, and Will has said that he expects Cronin to be as well (though my math gives us another year with him).

    SMS

    7 Nov 24 at 11:10 am

  2. I’ve got Solesky as a 19D, even though he was a 2024 MLFA. So, as a 2019 draftee he hasn’t hit 6years yet, so I wonder if that supercedes the fact that we got him as a 2024MLFA. SAme with a few other recent MLFAs (CJ Stubbs, Solesky, Naranjo, Kelvin Diaz, Bloebaum). But yeah its a good question.

    Todd Boss

    7 Nov 24 at 12:52 pm

  3. Oh: Cronin = 19D so one more year.

    Todd Boss

    7 Nov 24 at 12:52 pm

  4. so, i think i may know why 18IFAs aren’t free yet. They were signed in JULY of 2018 … which means they probably didn’t play in 2018 so maybe the clock doesn’t start until 2019. I dunno.

    Todd Boss

    7 Nov 24 at 1:31 pm

  5. Interesting – an extra year of control is a pretty good reason not to rush those IFA signings on to a roster. Though I guess moving the date to January fixes the schedule going forward.

    And good point about Solesky. That’s how a major league FAs with less than 6 years of service are treated — free to sign with anyone, but then subject to the all the restrictions in the standard rookie contract — so I’m pretty sure you are right about that.

    SMS

    7 Nov 24 at 1:56 pm

  6. Yeah, the only name on here that really surprises me is Theophile. He got hurt in mid-August and ended the season on the 60-day IL, so likely the team knows something that we don’t.

    KW

    7 Nov 24 at 3:30 pm

  7. I don’t blame the Nats for the miss on the Kieboom pick nearly as much as I do for the risks they took on Romero and Denaburg in particular. The conventional wisdom was that 2016 was a teenager draft . . . although if you look back on that 1st round now, you’ll see that it turned out to be a Teenaged Wasteland:

    https://www.baseball-reference.com/draft/index.fcgi?year_ID=2016&draft_round=1&draft_type=junreg&query_type=year_round

    The one teenaged star from that draft, Bo Bichette, went on pick #66, eight picks after the Nats took the immortal Sheldon Neuse. (The Nats took Neuse for an under-slot sign so they could go after Luzardo in the 3d round, but in doing so, they passed on Bryan Reynolds, Pete Alonso, and Bichette.)

    As for Kieboom, he had an excellent progression through the minors and pre-2020 rated #11 by Baseball Prospectus and #15 by BA. The Nats were counting on him to back-fill for Rendon (large spikes to fill), but in doing so, they missed that his extra-base power dried up in the second half of 2019, even playing in the rare air of the PCL. He slugged .544 in June but didn’t reach .400 the rest of the way. On June 24 he hit his fourth homer of the week, giving him 13 after only 57 AAA games (plus two in the majors). But in the remaining 52 games, he hit only 3. Two-thirds of his doubles came before July 1.

    In the 2018 season across Potomac and Harrisburg, Kieboom totaled 31 doubles and 16 homers, so his first-half numbers at AAA were right in line with what he had done there, even accounting for PCL inflation.

    Anyway, in hindsight way better than 20-20, the Nats should have traded Kieboom (and Robles) in the offseason between 2019 and 2020 instead of depending on them to be foundational pieces. The mistake was less in drafting him than it was in hanging onto him after baseball started figuring him out.

    KW

    7 Nov 24 at 4:29 pm

  8. I confess that I would have screwed up the 2018 first pick. Seth Beer was my draft crush that year, at least in the range where the Nats were picking, and the Trastros took him right after the Nats picked Denaburg. Beer nearly cost us the World Series, too, as he was a key part of the deal that brought Greinke to Houston at the 2019 deadline. Ol’ Zach had only given up one hit through six innings . . .

    With hindsight better than 20-20, the pitcher to take was Shane McClanahan, who went four picks after Denaburg. At 6-1, 200, though, he doesn’t fit Rizzo’s ideal. (But then neither did Tim Cate at 6-0, 185, who went in the 2d round of that 2018 draft, seven picks ahead of Josiah Gray.)

    KW

    7 Nov 24 at 4:50 pm

  9. I didn’t like the Denaburg pick. I don’t like high school pitchers in general, all the more injured ones. He was yet another who might have been on the fringes of the top 10 picks if healthy. That was also a period where the Nats weren’t drafting enough hitters, which made me skeptical of Cate in the second round as well.

    If you look at Cate’s stats, he had a solid 2019 season, but he was never the same after that. Was the jump to AA too much for him, or did the missed COVID season also hinder his development? It was a similar story with Reid Schaller, the 3d rounder in 2018 — decent in 2019 but not so much after the break. Prior to COVID, the Nats were converting him to a starter, but that experiment had ended by 2021.

    KW

    7 Nov 24 at 5:01 pm

  10. Todd, with Solesky, since he’s on the AFL roster, presumably he will still be with the organization (unless lost in Rule 5).

    KW

    8 Nov 24 at 7:53 am

  11. Kieboom pick: it’s pretty difficult to complain about a 28th overall pick not working out. The 2016 draft has turned out to be a really weak one: Moniak 1st overall and has done very little, no real major stars in the entire 1st round. Will smith the only 1st round or 1st Supp with double digit career WAR. 28th overall is way too low to even attempt to project as a fan.

    Denaburg pick: same thing. 27th overall. Its one thing to pick a guy in the top 10 and have them fail … but by the time you get to the bottom of the 1st round it’s just that much harder. Also, another bad draft. There’s not really an impact player picked after Denaburg for dozens of picks. Yes, he’s a HS arm and the risk/reward is really high … Giolito has turned out ok in that regard, but our history of prep RHPs is poor.

    Todd Boss

    8 Nov 24 at 8:09 am

  12. @Todd and SMS,
    I dug a bit deeper into the R5 vs MLFA eligibility and concede that I was wrong. The difference seems to come down to the fact that free agency comes after “six full seasons” of play, whereas R5 eligibility comes after “four seasons”. No mention of “full”. This word is routinely left out of explanations of free agency eligibility, including those on MLB’s own website, hence my confusion. Thus, there are different ways to calculate service times for R5 than for free agency. Thus, as appeared to be the case, 2019 draftees are still safe.

    However, this does introduce some interesting implications I hadn’t appreciated before. First, there is a strong disincentive to send a recently drafted player to the FCL or A Ball in the season they’re drafted, as even just a few games will count as a season of play towards the 4 year R5 eligibility, and require the player to sit on the 40 man for 3 seasons instead of 2. No wonder teams have been keen to kill the FCL.

    Take the following case study: the Nationals opted to send Marquis Grissom to the FCL/Fburg in 2022 after drafting him as a 20 year old college sophomore. He ended up pitching only 7 games in the shortened 2022 season, meaning Grissom may need to sit on the 40 man for an additional season (if he hasn’t reached the majors by that point). It’s pretty clear that it’s not just arm fatigue keeping pitchers from reporting to play in the same season they’re drafted.

    Lastly, are we sure that the lost COVID season doesn’t have any impact here? I know the MLBPA negotiated 2020 counting as service time, but with the above different definitions to “season”, I wonder if some sort of loophole has been introduced?

    Will

    8 Nov 24 at 8:22 am

  13. On the first round picks, I can’t get too bent out of shape over Kieboom busting. In the larger scheme of things, he was a rather successful 1st round pick. He was at one point a top 10 prospect and played not insignificant time in the majors. That’s better than the vast majority of 1st round picks. Also, the logic behind drafting him at the time was very sound.

    Denaburg, on the other hand, was one of many of Rizzo/Kline’s, “we know better than everyone else” picks that they liked so much: drafting distressed goods in hopes of recovering their lost value. Turns out, everyone else was staying away for very good reason. This was the case with Denaburg, but also Elijah Green, Romero, Giolito and a lesser extent with Rutledge and House. Altogether that’s the better part of a decade of first round draft picks. You simply can’t afford to take a pretty big gamble on your first round pick, and then have it only pay off a small fraction of the time. First rounders are your only chance of decent success. Save the lottery picks for later rounds.

    Will

    8 Nov 24 at 8:36 am

  14. Thanks for the additional context, Will. And I’ll say that for my part I have no idea about COVID policies and exceptions. It would certainly make sense for the cancelled minor league season to have some effect, but I haven’t seen anything from a team or league source on that.

    I do think I recall seeing that the new minor league CBA shortens the MLFA timing by a year, so I think there will be a season soon where there’s double the usual turnover. Not sure when that will be though.

    SMS

    8 Nov 24 at 11:25 am

  15. To follow on SMS about the Ramirez, he was absolutely a fair return for Schwarber. Schwarbs was a pending free agent who was on the DL with a hamstring pull at the time. Yes, he was Ruthian for the month of June, but who knew if he’d come back strong? If anything, at the time I regarded Ramirez as a better return than I expected. Yeah, he was a lottery pick. But he was a good lottery ticket. He was ranked as a 40+ prospect, #19 of the 75 prospects dealt at the 2021 deadline by FG. Their comment at the time:

    “Ramirez is an ultra-athletic young righty with an advanced changeup and command. He’s risky due to his age/occupation, and grades out like a second round JUCO arm.”

    It didn’t work? He blew out his arm and didn’t make it back. TINSTAAPP and all that. Disappointing in hindsight, but at the time a reasonable shot to take.

    John C.

    8 Nov 24 at 2:22 pm

  16. I feel like maybe what I wrote, and what I meant, about Aldo Ramirez and Schwarber wasn’t as clear as it should be.

    I wrote, “Aldo Ramirez, trade bounty for Kyle Schwarber in 2021 and who was supposed to be a decent SP prospect. Blew out his arm, missed two years, never really pitched again. Too bad; Schwarber was a solid trade prospect and should have fetched something of value for us longer term.”

    What i probably should have written was, “I wish that the inevitable trade asset we got for Schwarber had worked out, given that he was so good for us earlier in the year.” You all are right: I think Aldo Ramirez at the time and given Schwarber’s DL status was indeed a fair trade. I still think that. It wasn’t Boston or Schwarber’s fault that Ramirez got hurt and stayed hurt; that stuff happens all the time right? I didn’t mean to over- or under- sell Ramirez’ trade value really; just an observation.

    I mean, I also wish Cavalli hadn’t just missed two f*cking years, and I wish Kieboom hadn’t gone from a top 20 prospect to a bust. We’ve had our fair share of prospects not work out recently … we’re frigging due for a breakout from Woods or Crews or somebody. I’m ecstatic that Sykora has turned into such a massive prospect. Maybe Lile is found good, maybe House turns into a starting 3B, maybe Hassell forces the issue in the MLB outfield and someone becomes 1B/DH. would love it.

    Todd Boss

    8 Nov 24 at 5:29 pm

  17. You’re hitting on some real chicken-egg issues here, though: are the prospects failing because they weren’t that good in the first place (poor drafting/scouting), or because of poor development? Or both? Rizzo apparently decided “both,” since he has blown out the draft folks and the development folks over the last couple of years; in fact he’s changed leadership on the development side twice.

    All in all, 2024 was an excellent year in pitcher advancement in the organization, but not among the hitters. This can be discussed in more detail during the long winter, but the hitters aren’t where they should be. Another “tell” is that Hassell seems have been pointed in the right direction by coaches from other organizations while at the Arizona Fall League, hitting much better, and for more power, than he has since the trade. (SSS and plus a lot of injury issues, so I don’t want to generalize too much, but it jumps out when someone seems to play better for different coaches. Millas did the same thing in AZ a couple of falls ago.)

    KW

    8 Nov 24 at 5:41 pm

  18. It’s also Hassell’s third time through the AFL, so these new coaches must be better than the last couple rounds of different coaches too.

    Hassell’s story of the swing fix is that he worked it out himself during the week or so he had off before heading to AZ. He was back home with his folks, and watching himself swing in the reflection on a glass door, just like he’d done for hours as a kid – and bam, he was able to make some change. But who knows how much of that is bullshit.

    I’m not even sure his overall production is all that much better than we’d expect. He ran a 113 wRC+ in AA last year. Given the hitter friendly conditions, what wRC+ do you think his current line translates to? Maybe 120? 86 PAs of slightly better than expected results won’t do much to shift my priors. The most heartening things are (1) he seems actually healthy and (2) he’s regaining some confidence after a rough start in AAA. Beyond that, I’m going to wait and see how much of this power shows up next season before I put too much stock in it.

    SMS

    8 Nov 24 at 8:43 pm

  19. “SSS and plus a lot of injury issues, so I don’t want to generalize too much, but …”

    I don’t want to do it, but I’m gonna do it!

    Hassell’s performance in the AFL is encouraging, but it should be taken with a grain of salt (river). Not only SSS, but the AFL this year is a hitter’s league. Yes, Hassell’s OPS is an eye-catching .906. But it’s not only SSS, it’s in a league where the average OPS .809. It would be interesting to see what that amounts to in a OPS+/wRC+ type of stat.

    John C.

    9 Nov 24 at 3:49 pm

  20. This is the first time since the trade that Hassell has been looking anything like the player he was before the trade. I don’t care if it’s against the Vienna Little League, I’ll take it. YMMV.

    Hassell has confused me probably more than any others among the Nats’ top prospects, and presumably has confused the Nats’ brass as well. Is this who he really is? Who know. But it’s a hell of a lot better than him floundering.

    KW

    9 Nov 24 at 4:25 pm

  21. Hey! don’t knock Vienna Little League; they’re a powerhouse! You’re talking to a Vienna National graduate right here! 🙂 Many a weekend did I play at Yoenas Park

    Todd Boss

    10 Nov 24 at 9:57 pm

  22. On Hassell … even Baseball America has given up hope. He’s now outside their top 10, as released last week and covered on Nationals Prospects. I’ll wait til Jan/Feb when they do their top 30 to do my typical recap/deep dive/ridicule on their full list.

    Todd Boss

    11 Nov 24 at 9:28 am

  23. Interesting fact about Hassell:

    Through his first 19 games during the regular season, his OPS was .910. Through 19 games in the AFL, his OPS is .906

    As we all know, Hassell then proceeded to post a .567 OPS in his subsequent 66 games, ending up with a terribly disappointing season that has rightfully seen him plummet on prospect lists. However, this .906 OPS with lots of scouts eyes on him may slow that fall just a bit, and for the Nats that’s an incredibly good thing.

    Hassell is surplus requirements to the Nats, because Jacob Young has proven to be what we thought Robert Hassell was supposed to be: a good contact hitter, with some speed and good defense. Except Young has proven to exceed even the highest expectations we could have ever had from Hassell in terms of speed and defense, while sacrificing some power.

    And don’t forget we have Daylen Lile and Andrew Pinckney putting up similar/better numbers at the same level as Hassell. At this point, Hassell is trade bait. Rizzo has never given up on former top prospects, so there’s almost certainly another GM out there willing to pay something of value to try to unlock that untapped potential. At least his 2024 AFL performance makes that potential not feel so far away as it used to.

    Will

    11 Nov 24 at 10:13 am

Leave a Reply