"Abrams has three seasons of team control left. The Nationals need to assess whether they will be able to field a competitive team in the next three years. Most likely, Washington will begin to compete for a playoff spot in two to three seasons. The Nationals would have three seasons of productive Abrams, but it would not amount to anything. Instead, the Nationals should trade Abrams while his value is highest and acquire prospects that could help the team when they are ready to compete."
"Abrams also may not be an ideal fit on future Nationals teams. He is a subpar defender who the team should move to second base. The Nationals should prioritize athletic and dynamic players who play defense well. Abrams would not make sense with that philosophy. However, by trading Abrams, the team would be extending what has already been a very long rebuild."
Trading CJ Abrams makes sense despite prolonging the Nationals' rebuild because he has three seasons of team control and the club likely will not compete meaningfully during that period. Moving Abrams now would yield prospects who better align with a rebuilt core. Abrams' defensive issues suggest a position change to second base and a misfit with a philosophy prioritizing athletic, defensively strong players. Trading Abrams would acknowledge that the initial rebuild centered on Gore, Abrams, and Wood failed to produce a playoff-caliber team. The organization should accept the setback, restructure the core, and pursue a fresh rebuild, though fans will be disappointed.
Read at District on Deck
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]