Trea Turner Will Not Save You

It wouldn’t be baseball if we didn’t spend our days worrying about something. The Nats may be tied for first place and seven games over .500, but a three game losing streak and run drought (prior to Wednesday night’s crooked number curly W) has folks stocking up on canned food and bottles of water.

As of Wednesday afternoon (before beating the Mets), the Nats were scoring 4.13 runs per game. Sub-par, sure, but hardly anemic, and not anything I was planning on worrying about just yet. The back-end of a double header, followed by Jose Fernandez and Noah Syndergaard… Well, that’s gonna put a cramp in your offensive style, no matter who you are.

For some though, tough pitching and the fact that it is early isn’t enough. They’ve already started working on solutions for something that might not yet be a problem. The drum beats harder for offensive prospect Trea Turner each day, as does the myth of his ability to lift full teams onto his back and carry them over offensive hurdles like none before.

To which I say, phooey. Trea Turner is a nice prospect and will probably be a nice player, but there can be no reasonable expectation he can fix what ails the Nationals right now. The problem is easy to identify: the Nats are DFL in OBP from the leadoff spot in 2016. Michael A. Taylor failed miserably in the leadoff spot in his replacement of the injured Ben Revere. The best that can be hope for with Revere is that his failures are rust coming back to form from his injury. The top spot hasn’t got on base so the Nats are starting games and innings with outs, not baserunners.

Revere and Taylor aren’t the only ones though. Here’s the OBP of the Nationals by position in the batting order (and where they rank for that slot in MLB):

1st .219 (30)
2nd .328 (20)
3rd .439 (2)
4th .325 (15)
5th .356 (9)
6th .283 (23)
7th .342 (7)
8th .340 (7)

As you can see, third and fifth are doing rather well (that’s Bryce Harper and Daniel Murphy’s doing if you didn’t know), while 2nd, and 6th (mostly Anthony Rendon and Jayson Werth) have been having a tough time compared to players hitting in their slots on other teams. (Props to Werth for being an OBP machine in the 2 spot last night though). The bottom of the lineup is doing okay (again compared to other 7 and 8 hitters), with 4th being average.

With the two top spots in the bottom third of the league in getting on base, it is not shocking that they aren’t scoring runs. It’s also not helpful that Ryan Zimmerman was splitting the two best hitters on the team, or the six hitter wasn’t bringing in Murphy. In other words, the hitters aren’t bunched together. It is a problem compounding a problem. So let us consider Trea Turner, and how he might help this team.

Turner is a slap hitter who gets on base pretty well. He doesn’t hit for power, and he actually doesn’t walk a ton, but he does protect the plate well and hit singles. Also (everyone’s favorite tool in a prospect) Turner is fast stolen base threat. “Turner the Burner!” rhymes, so it must be true. He plays good enough defense in middle infield and, one day, could be a very good leadoff man for a baseball team.

Turner also struggled last year in his first MLB stint. Over 27 games he posted a .295 OBP (much better than the current leadoff duo, but would still only be 28th in MLB) and was only 2 for 4 in stolen bases. He walked 4 times, struck out 12, and (if we can believe such a limited sample) was essentially a replacement level player for last September.

If (and this is a huge if) Turner came up to the majors and hit his projected .331 OBP, or .321 wOBA, he would be sitting about average for all of MLB at the top spot. A great accomplishment for him, and a boost to the Nats for sure.

Think about what that would require, though. You’d be plugging a AAA baseball player with 27 (not great) MLB games under his belt to bridge the gap between AAA and the MLB (which by many accounts is getting harder for hitters by the day) immediately, without struggling. You’d be putting him in maybe the most important spot in the lineup, which is also one of the more difficult spots to get a hit in, and also asking him to step into the most demanding defensive position on the field. At 22.

“Well why would he have to hit first?” You ask. Well if you’re hoping he’ll help the team score more runs, its the only place that makes sense. He isn’t at all the right type of guy to hit 3-6, he has almost zero power. There is no benefit if he does well in the 7 or 8 spot-his impact there would be negligible, almost certainly wiped out by other either the pitcher or who ever is hitting 8th. That leaves the top two spots, and either of those spots carries the pressure and requirements above.

Oh right, that means you have take Danny Espinosa off the field, and you have to bat either Revere or Rendon down in the 7 or 8 spot. I wonder how that will go over in the clubhouse: Disrupting two vets for one rookie who may or may not produce. The psychology of players is not something I care to dabble in, but I think it is fair to suggest there might be ripples from a move like that. Notice I haven’t even proposed a scenario in which Turner struggles, plays poorly, or washes out — which is a very real possibility. Let’s not forget that Free Trea Turner could easily go the way of Free Michael Taylor or Free Corey Brown.

It is not outside the realm of possibility that Turner will help the Nationals this year. It is not impossible that simply having him called up will act as some sort of psychic spark for the rest of the team and #BoomBackToBeingContenders. It just seems more likely (to me) that one or two of Revere, Rendon, Zimmerman or Werth will get back on track and the Nats will simply start scoring more runs.

In the meantime, why should the Nationals sabotage their control of such a good prospect over a few weeks of baseball where he is likely to play like a struggling rookie adjusting to the league? Better to call up Turner later in the year, retain control over his service time, and put him in a spot of the lineup where he can learn to succeed, rather than be marked for failure.