The Nationals are projected to lose 100+ games for the second time in as many years, and for the 5 years they have been in DC, they have had only one season where they reached a record of .500, ironically, their first in DC.   What the hell has gone wrong? (Stats from Friday, does not include Friday night and weekend games)

While it has been many, many things that have hurt the young franchise--rebuilding always means tearing down to start anew--pitching over the last few years has shown a precipitous decline, and leaves this writer wondering where this team would be if they could improve in just ONE area. 

Now before we analyze the data, there are some variables and caveats that must be stated. I chose 2005 and 2006 as two seasons to compare to the current one due to the 81-81 record in 2005, and the well documented stories of an exemplary bullpen in 2006.  While those seasons were played at RFK--a pitcher's park--the team and their performance represent the best points for analysis. 

Since 2005, the Nationals have never possessed an "ace" to lead their franchise.  They have gone into the season with some quality pitchers in a younger Livan Hernandez and an emerging John Patterson in 2005, while also bringing on some journeyman over they years like Esteban Loaiza and Ramon Ortiz to name a few.  What has been consistent over the years is that the starting rotation has never been a "strong" part of the Nationals.

2005

In 2005, the Nationals starting rotation was very close to the league average in terms of wins, ERA, and innings pitched as a % of total. What is telling, however is the percentage of wins by the starters vs. the league average:  64% to 70%.  The Nats relied heavily on the bullpen in 2005, and the results were fantastic.  With Chad Cordero anchoring a bullpen with good 7th and 8th inning pitchers (Majewski, Carrasco, Ayala), the Nats bullpen was one of the best by all measures in 2005. 36% of the teams wins vs. 33% of the teams losses and a save rate of 76% (69 save opps and only 18 blown saves). 

2006

Wow.  One of the worst starting pitching performances in recent memory.  The starting "ACE" was Ramon Ortiz and that alone is all you need to know to see a 45-64 record by starting pitchers.  Remember, this is a team that went 71-91! The bullpen in 2006 was not as good in 2005 (3.55 ERA vs. 4.49 ERA) but they buckled down when they needed to.  58% save percentage and accounted for 37% of the team's wins.  What is more important to notice though, was that the bullpen accounted for 39% of the innings pitched by the team as a whole.  2006 was frustrating for a lot of fans, but a 71-91 record showed some competitive games, and he bullpen single-handledly saved that season.

2009

What a total role reversal, in so many ways.  With a starting rotation that is now starting to show what it could be in 2-3 years, the Nationals are starting to think the term "ace" can apply to them.  But, they are far off.  These are kids.  This is a year when 61% of the innings should be borne by the 22 year old starters and the revamped bullpen should pick up the slack, right?  Well...lets look at the numbers and dig.

The starting staff has pitched 65% of the innings and has accounted for 71% of the team wins, 71%!!! These are kids! Yes, their ERA is 4.97, but the 2006 squad was 5.37, and they won 71 games--this team is barely on track for 50! % of losses? Starting staff has accounted for 55% of the team's losses.  55%!!! The average rotation in the NL accounts for 72% of their losses, so lets look at the bullpen.

The bullpen record is  8-30, accounring for 29% of the team's wins and 45% of their losses.  The Nationals save percentage is 41% compared to 74% in 2005 and a respectable, though not great, 58% in 2006.  Every metric in the league has the Nats bullpen as the last in the league.  So here is my question:

When we talk about building this team and turning a corner, why all the talk about the bats and the starters when we cannot get our bullpen worked out?  If the Nationals had converted even a 58% save rate, as they did in 2006, lowering their loss rate to a still astounding 8-25, though converting 58% of saves, the Nationals would have been 31-60.  If the Nationals had 5 more wins in the bullpen, now a 13-20, the bullpen would have won 36% of their games, akin to 2006, and the Nationals record would be 36-55 - still bad, but for a young staff, not horrific.  So what is next?

In my last piece, I talked about Drew Storen and a potental bullpen renaissance.  Couple Storen as the future closer, and Strasburg/Zimmermann/Lannan/Detwiler, Stammen, etc, this team has a chance to chart a new statistical history and bring this team in line with the league norms.  Now if they could only field the ball....

Starting Pitching

NL AVERAGE Starting Pitching

Bullpen Pitching

Bullpen Pitching

      

Good news for The Chief, Chad Cordero was signed to a minor league contract in Seattle this week as he begins his road back to his old self.  Cordero deserved better than what he got from JimBow, and I hope he has some success in Seattle.  The M's are in desparate need for a closer with the departure of J.J. Putz and setup man Brandon Morrow moving to the rotation/injury issues.

Good luck Chief, here is hoping your 78 mile per hour fastball fools the hitters in the AL West.