The Rizzoless Draft

The Washington Nationals just had their first draft without Mike Rizzo’s involvement since 2006 which had everyone looking for clues about the direction of the front office. Would the analytics department be getting more of a say? Will the Nats avoid the usual pitfalls Rizzo’s scout-led approach fell into like pitchers with high velocity, but easy to hit fastballs or hitters with tons of raw power they can’t translate into game power? Is there any sign that things might get better?

There were some encouraging signs. The Nationals selected Eli Willits with their first overall pick. Willits was the youngest player in the draft and was ranked the No. 1 draft prospect by the data-driven Baseball Prospectus prospect team. Willits does everything well but does not flash with one specific tool like huge power, speed, or arm strength. He does not feel like a Mike Rizzo prospect, however it cannot be underrated that Willits was also projected to accept the most underslot deal.

For those who may not know each MLB draft pick comes with a specific maximum bonus value that is combined into a single bonus pool a team can pay out to their draft picks. Unlike the NFL draft where players are guaranteed to sign for the slot value, in MLB the teams have more discretion over how the bonus pool is spread out which leads to a common tactic of paying more than the assigned value (overslot) for some prospects by saving money paying other prospects less (underslot).

Rizzo’s draft strategy has often to go all-in and overpay about 3 star prospects and then save money by taking college seniors the rest of the draft. Drafting college seniors is a simple way to save money as they have no leverage to threaten returning to school, however they are usually available because they were not seen as a valuable prospect when they were first draft eligible. This leads to a farm system with a familiar pattern to Nats fans, a couple of star prospects at the top and absolutely no depth. And as Rizzo found out the last five years, the strategy works great as long as the star prospects succeed and immediately tanks your franchise the second one doesn’t.

While things might have seemed different this year with the Nationals reeling in six top 150 prospects, they did not actually change strategies, they just had more bonus pool money to work with by picking Willits. To give you an idea of how far the Nationals are behind the smartest teams, I’ve broken down the Nationals draft by the number of top 150 prospects and college seniors taken alongside the top 5 smartest front offices as voted on by MLB executives.

It’s a pretty stark difference. Despite being the only team in this group to draft within the top ten (Rays 14, Brewers 20, Guardians 27), they ended up with basically the same number of top 150 prospects as every team except the Yankees. On top of that, despite having the second highest bonus pool with millions more than most of the other teams in this group (only the Rays had more) the Nationals drafted the most college seniors.

The secret is that while drafting and signing college seniors is the easiest way to save bonus pool money it’s not the only way. The smartest teams instead identify players with a lot of weaknesses that keep them off top prospect lists but a specific skill they think they can use as an anchor for further development. This can be an athletic two-way player that needs more direction on which side to choose or a pitcher with good pitch shapes who doesn’t know how to use them effectively in games yet. And frequently they’re looking at the opposite end of the age spectrum, finding draft-eligible college sophomores with these traits they can sign now at a lower price before a breakout.

Now most of these players will not become major leaguers, but they all have a significantly better chance than a college senior does. Finding them takes a lot more resources and effort than the Nationals have been willing to put into drafting and developing players. If they truly want to catch up with the smartest teams in player development they’ll need to invest in finding these low-cost but interesting prospects.

As an example of what that kind of change would look like, the New York Mets under David Stearns have made a remarkable turnaround from being one of the worst front offices in baseball to one of the best. In 2023 the year before Stearns joined the Mets they drafted seven college seniors. This year they drafted more sophomores (five) than seniors (two).

The process for the Nationals will be a lot slower. They cannot pull the same move the Dodgers or Mets did by just buying the best front office in baseball. However, they can certainly meet the spending level set by the Rays, Guardians and Brewers, and over time bring in smart, passionate people who know how to use the data and can overhaul the Nats approach and leave the Rizzo way in the dustbin of history.