Between now and the time MLB begins its next regular season, the Washington Nationals only need to do two things. Add one good starting pitcher. And fix the damn bullpen.
Then the Nats make the playoffs next year.
Probably.
By adding three pitchers — none of them great, but all just MLB-average at their jobs — the Nats should reduce their runs allowed by 70 or more.
Trending
All things being equal, that will boost the Nats’ run differential next year to about plus-80, the level which usually equates to 90 wins — and a playoff spot. We’ll “run the numbers” later, but they’re basic.
Ownership, with a payroll the size of a tip jar, can afford it. With the last $35 million of Stephen Strasburg’s deal off the books, the Nats now have zero “albatross” contracts. Their ’27 salary obligations are less than $70 million, according to Baseball-Reference.
No Nat is likely to make $10 million next season, not even CJ Abrams, who recently joined Alex Rodriguez and Bobby Witt Jr. as the only shortstops in MLB history with 30 homers, 30 steals and 100 RBI in a season. Abrams recently accommodated the Nats by moving to second base, presumably so Seaver King (in ’27) or Eli Willits (in ’28) can upgrade shortstop for years. It shouldn’t hurt CJ’s market value. How many 30-30-100 second basemen have existed? One: Alfonso Soriano who did it twice as a Yankee.
If the Nats don’t act this winter, when such sensible spending on two-to-three-year contracts to pitchers can produce such outsized results, then fans may want to emulate ownership next season and spend very little money on the Nats.
My working assumption, based on the recent four-year, $47 million contract extension with staff ace Cade Cavalli, plus a team option at $23 million to keep him in ’31, too, is a sign that the Lerners understand that the time is ripe.
Rarely have I looked forward to the offseason of a Washington team so much. True, the owners will almost certainly lock out the players before New Year’s Day. But MLB, which killed the ’94 World Series, has never canceled a whole year. MLB won’t go full suicide pact with the players this winter, either. They’ll be back.
The Nats’ job is to be ready when they are.
To win 90 games, which makes you a contender, though not a powerhouse, you need to outscore your foes by about 80 runs. As a rule of thumb, for every additional nine runs that you outscore the league, you’ll finish one more game above .500. Over several seasons combined, this formula is very precise. It’s worked for a century. Of course, in any one year, you can be a half-dozen wins lucky or unlucky. (This year, the Nats have been six losses “unlucky.” They’re due.)
But that’s how you build your roster.
With three games to play, the Nats have a plus-seven run differential, which is a huge 221-run improvement in one season.
That’s especially amazing because they did it while using the Sisyphus Method. Their bullpen was the boulder. The eighth and ninth innings were the mountain. Sisyphus always got his boulder to the top, then it rolled down. But he wasn’t hurt. The Nats? Forty-two times the boulder crushed ’em.
This year, from the eighth inning onward, the Nats have allowed 230 runs in 297 innings. Their ERA is 6.33. This much scoring should be impossible in a parent-pitch youth league. But the Nats have done it.
Luckily, in MLB, the bigger the problem, the easier the solution — or the first steps to a solution, anyway. Why? It should be child’s play to improve from “horrible” to merely “very bad.” You can even improve from horrible to “poor” quite fast.
What would that mean for the Nats?
The Angels are 25th in ERA from the eighth inning onward. Yet they’ve only allowed 181 runs — 49 fewer than the Nats! The 20th-ranked team (still poor) has allowed 161 runs — 69 fewer than the Nats.
A Nats bullpen in ’27 that ranked in that 20th to 25th range in the late innings — talk about a low bar for a team with money to spend — would have a fine shot at cutting runs allowed by 60. That alone might put the Nats in MLB’s 12-team playoffs next year.
If you want to fantasize about an “average” bullpen in the late innings (with a 3.97 ERA), the Nats might allow 85 fewer runs than in ’26.
The Nats don’t need a whole new bullpen.
They only need two new relievers. A closer and a set-up man. Those two pitchers would work about 150 of the 300 or so innings that every team has from the eighth inning onward in a 162-game season. But they’d work a large majority of those innings when holding a narrow lead. Also, their presence would put all the Nats’ young relievers in less stressful roles more appropriate to their abilities and experience.
By asking less, you’d get more out of solid, established Brad Lord and … let me think, there must be somebody else … OK, probably Orlando Ribalta. Though their sample size is small, MLB’s Baseball Savant metrics also project Will Dion, Riley Cornelio, Erik Tolman and Jack Sinclair as useful relievers (4.00 ERA, give or take), though not stars.
The Nats are proud that in the last two months they’ve brought up “bigger arms” from the minors with higher ceilings. As a group, they are also very wild young arms. Don’t squash ’em with pressure.
The Nats shouldn’t overrate their own prospects, or their ability to coach them up. It’s a common mistake. I’ve dug into spin rates, induced break, first-strike percentage and all the rest. Some may blossom; but for ’27, they need help. If the Nats repeat ’26, fans may hold their own Boycott-for-a-Bullpen Night.
The addition of a starting pitcher is also obvious. This year, the Nats hoped Zack Littell, Miles Mikolas and Jake Irvin could be “innings eaters.” They ate ’em, all right — 330 of them with a 5.40 ERA.
The average MLB starter has an ERA in the 4.20s. Right now, the ’27 rotation may be Cavalli, Connelly Early (from the Curtis Mead trade), Andrew Alvarez and two question marks. One answer may be DJ Herz, who’s now back from Tommy John surgery after having a fine rookie season in ’24 with a 4.17 ERA and 10.74 strikeouts-per-nine innings in 19 starts.
But that’s just not enough. Any winning team knows that a solid five-man rotation requires eight starting pitchers! You’re gonna need ‘em.
Last year, Littell fit the profile — a sturdy 30-year-old with a 3.95 ERA over the two previous years. He flopped. Pitchers are unstable isotopes. You take your chances.
So, try again.
One more solid starter stabilizes your rotation, eats innings and takes pressure off your bullpen. How many fewer “runs allowed” does this fellow generate? Probably 20, at least.
Nats fans can sense what a ton of fun was lost this season, courtesy of the bad pitching, with a team that’ll probably finish third in MLB in runs, first in steals, first in extra-base hits, second in total bases and fifth in home runs.
The Nats have had a stunning load of good news in president Paul Toboni’s first year, from the ascension of Cavalli (who stayed healthy for 32 starts), Daylen Lile (who may be a speedster with power and a good leftfielder, too) and Jacob Young (who raised his OPS by 123 points), to catcher Keibert Ruiz reviving his career while playing a well-rested 105 games instead of an exhausted 135.
But, ironically, the best news of ’26 is how awful the bullpen was and how often the “innings eaters” were an eyesore.
The Nats have the youngest every-day players in MLB, average age 24.7 years old. They have one of the top-rated minor league systems with plenty of trade pieces. They are almost overloaded with bats. Rookie manager Blake Butera and his staff seem to have the ear of the clubhouse despite the blown saves.
The Nats need to understand how close they probably are. Not to a title. But to having a playoff team with a sound foundation. Don’t keep waiting and dawdling. If you won’t step up to support your own players, and your fans, then don’t buy an MLB team.
Someday, there’ll be an offseason for an incredibly bold move, like the Max Scherzer signing.
But not this winter. This is the easy one. Do the obvious. And expect large dividends.
Author
