Is the Strategy of the Scherzer Move Too Obvious?

The official signing of Max Scherzer went down yesterday in Washington and reading the tea leaves of Mike Rizzo’s intentions remains one of the top off-season topics. Does he trade Zimmermann, Fister, or Strasberg? It is only a matter of time before MLB Trade Rumors posts a reader survey asking which one will leave the fold in DC first.

It is important to remember, however, that the Scherzer signing was preceded by the trade of Tyler Clippard by a scant week. The linking of the two moves was not by happenstance but by design. Converted from starting in 2009–in the same spring that Mike Rizzo took over the helm in Washington–Clippard became one of the most reliable fixtures in the Nationals pitching arsenal. Pitching over seven seasons in DC, he racked up 464 innings of 2.68 ERA. He was the rock solid foundation of the Nationals bullpen. But for all of that dependability, he was due to make almost $10 million in 2015 and was a free agent who might likely seek to close somewhere else.

Clippard’s departure freed up salary and brought in a much needed second baseman in Yunel Escobar; perhaps not the young equivalent that Rizzo had sought in Seattle or elsewhere, but none the less, his departure fetched back a key 2015 ingredient. The mystery was that it also created a gaping hole and few have been comfortable with the solution that is as obvious as it is compelling.

Where does Washington find another Tyler Clippard to pitch in the seventh, eighth or ninth inning? Max Scherzer is not going to pitch in relief for $210 million–give or take a few million in present value. But by adding him to the rotation, Tanner Roark, who has been an excellent starter goes back to a relief role and his abilities in that capacity have been impressive. Given that Tyler Clippard was a converted starter, who failed in his auditions for that role, perhaps Roark is even more intriguing.

Before being pressed into service in the Washington rotation late in 2013, Roark was an excellent reliever. At Syracuse in 2013 he closed 11 nine games–almost as many as he started–and earned two saves. He was being groomed for relief almost as certainly as Tyler Clippard was in 2008 before becoming full time in the Washington bullpen. Whereas Clippard was ineffective as a starter, Roark thrived there when given the opportunity. But in 30 innings of relief for the Nationals in 2013, Roark pitched to a 1.19 ERA.

While much is being made of Washington’s ability to trade a starter after the addition of Scherzer, little consideration is being given to how well the two recent moves have completed the team strategically.

The bullpen has no fewer than ten relievers competing for the seven slots that will travel north in April 2015. But among them there are few who are likely to provide the seasoned excellence that Tanner Roark can add. Drew Storen will close and he has ample experience for the task, though there have been notable blowups in the post-season and a 2013 regular season where he posted a lamentable 4.52 ERA. Roark does not have the prototypical stuff to close should Storen falter again, but if there is anyone among the current relief corps who might step in, Roark has as good a chance to succeed as a closer as anyone. His fastball velocity is only a tick below Storen’s and his command is far better.

The most damning attribute of any reliever is an inability to pitch in the strike zone comfortably. As Washington closers, Raphael Soriano and Drew Storen have both had their worst stretches when they put runners on needlessly and were then forced to throw predictable strikes. Tanner Roark’s command of the strike zone has been his most notable weapon over two seasons now in the majors. Batters take more of Roark’s pitches for strikes than almost any other pitcher in the majors. Call it luck or pinpoint control. Either way it is something that could make him the kind of dependable reliever that Tyler Clippard was for seven years.

So, was the trade of Tyler Clippard a strategic move made with the knowledge that adding a strong starter to the rotation would allow Washington to trade for prospects that will help down the road, or was it made knowing Roark can replace Clippard? The most convincing evidence for the latter is that Washington is All-in-to-Win in 2015. That is an indisputable fact. So the idea that Mike Rizzo would now trade one of his quality starters must pass the smell test with what it brings back. If Boston is willing to trade prospects AND Rizzo still gets a quality replacement for Clippard, then it is not out of the question.

It has been rumored that the Nationals are in the hunt for Burke Badenhop . No disrespect intended, but he is no Tyler Clippard and I cannot see him filling the hole in the bullpen created when Clippard left for Oakland. Any trade of one of the existing Nationals starters will have to include a major league ready starter who can move Roark to the pen, or a relief pitcher similarly ready to step into a major league role.

Those are tough parameters even for Mike Rizzo to meet, and as we move closer to Spring Training, the chances for a mega-deal for a Stephen Strasburg or Jordan Zimmermann seem to diminish and the chances increase exponentially that what you see in Washington now is what you get for Opening Day 2015. And that is not a bad thing because with Tanner Roark pitching in the late innings, the Washington bullpen is at least as good as it was in 2014, maybe better. Rizzo set out early in the off-season to improve the Washington nationals team that lost in the first round of the 2014 playoffs and my money says he has done exactly that and will not make further moves unless they very clearly add to those odds.