Lest we forget, amidst the drama of the abrupt dismissal of Manager Dave Martinez and President of Baseball Operations Mike Rizzo, we are now closing in on hearing the words: “With the first pick in the 2025 MLB Draft, the Washington Nationals select…”
It’s no exaggeration to say the Nats’ decision could shape the direction of the organization for years to come. Bryce Harper was a generational pick in 2010, but it was Stephen Strasburg (2009’s first overall pick) who went on to lead Washington to its first world championship. Other top draft picks like Gerrit Cole, Carlos Correa, and Paul Skenes have gone on to superstardom as well. Some, like Dansby Swanson and Spencer Torkelson, have turned into solid albeit unspectacular players. And a few, like Mark Appel, have been total busts.
We don’t know that much (yet) about Interim General Manager Mike DeBartolo. What is he looking for on draft day? Will he defer to Scouting Director Danny Haas and his team? Or will he wield ultimate authority as the Nats’ new decider-in-chief?
A few possible franchise directions that next Sunday’s draft pick(s) could suggest for the Nats…
The Favorites
LHP Kade Anderson (LSU)
Scouts see Anderson as a polished, quick-to-the-majors, frontline arm. His stock has risen considerably after a very strong finish to his collegiate career, including a complete-game shutout in the College World Series. The Nats could look for Anderson to slot in behind Gore as a #2/3 starter as early as the second half of 2026, although 2027 is a more realistic ETA.
On the other hand, it’s still a somewhat awkward fit with Gore’s window of team control. It might be more instructive to see Anderson as Gore’s successor. That could be true whether they overlap briefly, or Anderson’s presence in the system gives the Nats more confidence in trading Gore before his walk year — or both.
SS Ethan Holliday (Stillwater HS, Okla.)
A power-hitting prep shortstop with major league bloodlines, Holliday is generally considered the best player in the draft class — but it’s not by a great margin, and there are still some who prefer Anderson or others. Since Holliday’s ETA is probably 2028 or 2029, it’s tempting to think of him as CJ Abrams‘ successor. But scouts generally seem to think a move to third base is in his future.
It’s not worth worrying too much about how the Nats could fit both Holliday and Brady House into the infield. These problems tend to work themselves out over time. That said, drafting Holliday would point toward an effort to get good and stay good in the late 2020s and into the mid-2030s. Notably, the Nats’ system is very thin on corner infield prospects, with House graduating from prospect status soon and Cayden Wallace and Yohandy Morales fading.
The Dark Horses
SS Eli Willits (Fort Cobb-Broxton HS, Okla.)
Willits has three things going for him in the comparison to Holliday: He’s several months younger (17 on draft day), he’s seen as likelier to stick at shortstop, and he’s less hyped and therefore likelier to sign for a lower bonus. It’s easier to project him in the middle infield than Holliday, although he doesn’t hold a candle to Holliday as a hitter.
The Nats would certainly insist they think Willits is the best prospect in the draft, if they take him at 1-1. Still, it could be fairly read as a hedge against Seaver King and Luke Dickerson, their touted middle infield prospects from the last draft, underachieving so far in pro ball.
LHP Liam Doyle (Tennessee)
One of this draft class’s biggest risers of the spring, Doyle turned heads with a crackling fastball that might be the best pitch in the draft. Rizzo, for his part, might have found it hard to pass up a big pitcher with a big fastball. Doyle fits the bill, more so than the slightly built Anderson, whose best pitch is his curveball. But we don’t know yet if DeBartolo shares his longtime boss’ tendencies.
Doyle presents some reliever risk. The Nats might see that as a feature rather than a bug, if they take him at 1-1. They’ll have a choice between developing him as a hard-throwing mid-rotation starter or as an elite back-end reliever. The latter road to The Show could perhaps be a little shorter. Doyle isn’t regarded as being quite as polished as Anderson. But he could still pitch in MLB soon, especially in short stints.
LHP Jamie Arnold (Florida State)
The consensus best college pitcher in the draft entering the season, Arnold fell off a bit as spring wore on. He doesn’t throw as hard as Doyle, but he uses a sidearm delivery that is unusual for a starter. That delivery does create a bit of reliever risk. Whatever his role, Arnold would likely be on track to arrive in the majors by late 2026 or early 2027.
Arnold has a longer track record of success than Doyle or Anderson. He also threw the fewest innings of the three this season. The Nats could take advantage of his stagnation and slide down draft rankings to potentially sign him for a smaller bonus than they might need to offer the other two top college lefties. That could mean a strategy of spreading around the money more, instead of focusing on the best player available.
RHP Seth Hernandez (Corona HS, Calif.)
It’s rare for a right-handed high school pitcher to be drafted at 1-1. Hernandez was a buzzy name this spring, though, and the Nats do have a history of drafting prep righties in the first round. Under a new interim GM, would they do it with the top overall pick?
Prep pitchers carry extreme risk — they have a lot of growing and throwing to do before they’re MLB-ready — but some evaluators think Hernandez might be worth the risk. That’s a big decision for DeBartolo to make, less than a week into taking the big chair.
If the Nats do take the risk and draft Hernandez, it would definitely be with a post-Gore outlook in mind. It’s very unlikely he would reach the majors before Gore’s free agency.
SS Aiva Arquette (Oregon State)
Prior to Rizzo’s dismissal, many in the industry were downplaying the possibility of the Nats choosing Arquette at 1-1 over Holliday and Willits. I’ve seen some evaluators compare Arquette unfavorably to Holliday. Both are shortstops who hit for power, have a bit of swing-and-miss concern, and are probably too big to play shortstop at the next level. Arquette, obviously, is older and more developed than Holliday. From a conventional standpoint, he might be the “safest” pick in the draft, which could be attractive to DeBartolo.
Again, though, it’s tempting to wonder where Arquette fits with House in the picture. It’s a somewhat more relevant concern than it is with Holliday, given Arquette could enter the system on the Dylan Crews trajectory and be in the starting lineup by the end of the 2026 season. If the Nats take Arquette at 1-1, it could be seen a few different ways. A hedge against House failing to meet his projection? Confidence that Arquette could in fact be an MLB middle infielder? Optimism that Arquette will hit enough to potentially slot in as an MLB first baseman or corner outfielder? Or simply a new interim GM wanting to play it safe?
At any rate, Arquette is one of the more polished bats available. That suggests this could be an aggressive draft pick pointing to an intent to bolster the current/near-term core, while Gore and Abrams are still in D.C.
The Wild Cards
RHP Kyson Witherspoon (Oklahoma)
The Nats drafted more than their share of pitchers out of Oklahoma under the Rizzo administration. Witherspoon is generally seen by evaluators as a cut below the trio of college lefties (Anderson, Doyle, and Arnold) in terms of his talent level. That so, he actually posted the best stats of the four this season. He also throws the hardest, while also walking the fewest among them. So, how much do the under-new-management Nats care about handedness? And how much do they care about the scouting consensus?
Witherspoon could be in the major leagues within a year or so. He’s also likely to be available for less than any of the other top college pitchers. That could give the Nats more bonus space to play with in other draft rounds. This could be an aggressive move to contend before Gore hits free agency. It could also be the first move in a draft strategy aimed at building a stronger farm system.
SS Billy Carlson (Corona HS, Calif.)
Briefly, Carlson had some buzz toward the very top of the draft. But the scouting consensus is that he’s just a cut below the top prepsters from Oklahoma, Holliday and Willits. Evaluators love Carlson’s defense. However, they’re more divided over his ability to make consistent contact, and he lacks significant power projection. He’s also on the older side for a draft-eligible high schooler, as he’ll turn 19 this month.
So, why could the Nats conceivably buck expectations and select Carlson at 1-1? Some evaluators believe in Carlson’s bat. The Nats might, too. The glove and arm are elite. And the fact that he’s a year older than Willits may not make a huge difference for a team that, at least under Rizzo’s direction, has never put much stock in the type of analytical models that would count Carlson’s age against him.
Carlson would enter the Nats system as the presumptive shortstop of the future. The Nats might, possibly, be inclined to try to move him along quicker than they would Willits. That would put more pressure on King and other middle infield prospects to perform or be overtaken. Either way, the Nats would hope to have Abrams’ successor in line.
C/OF Ike Irish (Auburn)
Practically no one has talked about Irish going 1-1 to the Nats, but it doesn’t seem that crazy…does it? The Nats’ catching situation in MLB and Triple-A is dire. While Day 1 draftee Caleb Lomavita has responded well to a fairly aggressive track through the system, his value is entirely offensive at this point.
Irish mostly played in the outfield this year due to a shoulder injury. Evaluators are divided on him as a catcher. But, if the Nats shock the baseball world and draft him at 1-1, it would presumably be because they believe he’ll stick behind the plate.
Irish is a very polished hitter with a blend of contact ability, plate discipline, and power. He could be a fast riser if his skills translate smoothly to pro ball. Drafting Irish would send a sharp signal that the Nats are ready to move on from the Keibert Ruiz era.
Update With Predictions:
Let’s have folks weigh in on who they think will be the 1-1 pick or who they want as the 1-1 pick. We’ve started this off with predictions from more than just a few TalkNats folks.
Andrew Lang: Why can’t there be a Paul Skenes or even a Dylan Crews in this draft? I don’t see that true 1-1 pick. This feels like I am picking at 4 overall. I am staying away from Boras players so no Ethan Holliday, Kade Anderson, or Aiva Arquette. That leaves me with Jamie Arnold and Eli Willits and Seth Hernandez.
I said this to Mike Rizzo when we were smoking cigars that I would take Arnold. I won’t give you his response to that because that was between us. If Rizzo was still with the team, I still wouldn’t give his response. Naming off five names, he gave me two of the players he wasn’t choosing. That narrowed it down to tell me who was in his Final-3.
Arnold was the pitcher with all the No. 1 buzz on him for several months and the spotlight shining on him. In the Miami game, second inning, he took a comebacker off of his pitching hand. He shook it off and stayed in the game and statistically by doing that he hurt his stats and the No. 1 buzz moved on. Watching Arnold reminded me of watching Gore. He had to deal with bad umpiring and bad defense behind him. Kade Anderson is with LSU and gets those edge calls. Arnold just didn’t always get those close calls. Health hasn’t been an issue for Arnold, like Anderson, and the only difference in repertoire is Arnold doesn’t throw the cutter. I like Arnold’s delivery for the deception. So Arnold is my choice.
Chris Russell from Team 980 Radio: On Friday on the radio I said that I would slightly lean towards LSU LHP Kade Anderson at 1.1 for the Nationals.
After talking with some people in the baseball industry I respect, I am going to flip begrudgingly to Ethan Holliday. Big power bat. More likely to be a corner OF than IF. Great bloodline and probably a higher ceiling than Anderson.
DonH: As I have said in comments recently, I think you need to stock up on pitchers in the Draft. Yes, TJ and other injuries are an issue. But they are also an issue with signing FA pitchers. Seems to me that having a stable of cost-controlled pitchers might be the next trend in MLB. Given that, I am torn between Kade Anderson and Seth Hernandez. There is no safe pick; so why not go for the best arm (and player) available, Seth Hernandez, even if he is a HSer?
Forensicane: The Nationals as an organization have been far more successful developing pitching in recent years. That minor league coaching talent remains under the current regime. What the team is missing in talent are two-way players that have game changing and impact bats. Power throughout the system is underwhelming and years away at best. Younger power and impact bats like Cristhian Vaquero and Elijah Green have fizzled. However, just because the team has failed to develop offensive talents does not mean that the team has resolved its needs. That remains an issue even if Brady House and Dylan Crews translate into hi-bop major league careers.
On the pitching side, the starting pitching lacks workhorses and I am on the side of trading MacKenzie Gore IF a team readily overpays because they are all in. There are too many starters who cannot go more than five innings and do not translate into long term confidence. If one can draft a Paul Skenes, great. But otherwise, the Nationals’ draft successes of starters have almost always come from picks AFTER the first round. The most recent such promising arm, Travis Sykora, was an overpay from saved coin. Alex Clemmey is a trade acquisition but was likewise not round one, nor was Jake Bennett. Nor was Riley Cornelio, or Mitchell Parker, or Jake Irvin. Or Jordan Zimmermann. Who was a first rounder? Mason Denaburg, Jackson Rutledge, Lucas Giolito, Cade Cavalli. OK, they weren’t 1-1, but a lot happens on the way to the majors.
So my preference for the first round is a two-way player with a power and impact bat that can get quick to the majors. Aiva Arquette is a capable shortstop, and a shortstop can shift all over the diamond where the team needs him. So he is my first choice, especially because I think if they draft him #1, they will save money. If the team thinks that Kade Anderson is a T.O.R. all-star starter (Max Fried), or that Seth Hernandez is, I’m OK with that, but only under those circumstances. I’d rather they get a Travis Sykora in a later round. Big power in a two-way everyday player who has a strong hit tool and is major league ready is harder to find.
I think Rizzo would have drafted Anderson because of his yen for LSU talent and how he stepped up when it mattered most. But this draft regime looks at different metrics and needs. They also know the trajectory and expectations of different players that we do not and know whom we will (could) be moving at the trading deadline or targeting in free agency this fall. So maybe Kade Anderson (or Jamie Arnold) is a cheaper way to acquire an ace than laying out a six-year contract, which is demonstrably risky to the point of fiscally foolish for anyone. I haven’t mentioned Holliday, and maybe he checks my boxes and is worth the developmental wait. But on the sum, I would choose Aiva Arquette for the above rationale.
Kevin Nibley: I’ll go Ethan Holliday because after firing Rizzo and Davey, the Nats need some positive PR. And in a draft where there is no clear cut #1, taking the biggest name on the board makes sense. It also will immediately add some flavor to the rivalry with the O’s, and give casual Nats fans something to get excited about. In a crapshoot draft, take the PR win and MLB pedigree.
Mike Callow of ESPN 630 Radio: I’ve been waffling between Kade Anderson and Ethan Holliday. I think the Nats may try and replicate that excitement of the 2010s of having great pitching more days than not, and when you don’t draft an “ace” arm…we know the cost. I lean Anderson, but I won’t be shocked if it’s Holliday. Keep it simple: best pitcher or best position player. With no true #1 here, don’t overthink.
NationalsSource: I’ve been back and forth at #1 but as always it’s time to put down my wants for the year. Got a pretty solid hit rate for good players over the years hope this year is the same. This year I’m adding the slot values and getting creative. They have $16,597,800 to play with in the first 10 rounds and can go up to $17,427,690 if they use the 5% overage. Let’s have some fun.
Round 1: Eli Willits is my pick. He has one of the best hit tools in the class, is going to stay at short, sneaky power which could continue to grow as he is the youngest player in the class. He’s safer yes but he also has star upside as well. Not only do I really believe in the player but he should also come with some extra savings. I don’t know if he will go this low money wise but I do know the savings will help build a full class. I value the class as a whole because this drafts strength isn’t at the top it’s in its depth. *they could also take Holliday here and still squeeze these three players in but they would have to punt most of rounds 4-10 like they did in 2023.
You can get my other thoughts here for round 2 and 3.
NatsOfTheFuture: My case for: Seth Hernandez:
The combination of high velo RHP with a slider and plus command usually shouts upside. Throw in an excellent changeup as your top secondary, and you’re starting to build a solid floor. Add a 3000 RPM curveball, now we have premium upside. On top of his arsenal, Seth Hernandez has done about as much as you can do as a HS RHP. Analytics and footage of Hernandez are easy to find and easy to like. And in a draft with a lack of blue chip guys, I want this arm at #1.FTR, I will also be happy to hear Anderson, Willits, or Holliday called on Sunday.
Ryan MacReynolds: Seth Hernandez.
If this season has shown us anything, it’s that the Nats’ “wealth of starting pitching” in the organization may not be exactly what we thought it was. As guys who we assumed would be key pieces of the rotation have had some pretty serious struggles this season, it’s time to do more to bulk up our organization’s depth of starting pitching.
Hernandez, who some have described as “a better prep arm than Hunter Greene was,” looks to be the full package. When making this pick I was between him and Kade Anderson, and while I’d be okay with either, Hernandez’s arsenal just intrigues me a little more. His arm talent is without a doubt better, with an upper 90s fastball that touches triple digits, and a changeup that I could watch all day and not get tired. Obviously, there’s always an injury concern with younger arms who throw at the velocity he does. I think this is an opportunity for the Nats to swing for the fences and develop a pitcher who will one day anchor their rotation in a postseason run.
Sao: My prediction is Eli Willits. I’ve had a spidey-sense about him all spring, and with DeBartolo now at the helm preaching analytics and models, I think the odds have spiked that we draft and sign him for well under slot. Willits isn’t my preference, personally. I don’t see a carry tool there, and to me, the development risk with a 17-year-old at 1-1 is unacceptable. He hasn’t (yet) shown the elite results of others at the top of the class. The evaluators say we ought to trust he’ll hit for more impact as he matures, and they might be right, but that’s a gamble with the top overall pick. Bleacher Report compares his plausible ceiling to “peak Édgar Rentería“. Rentería was a useful supporting player on some pretty good teams, but it must be said, he wasn’t a franchise-caliber talent.
My preference is probably Aiva Arquette. I recognize the ceiling isn’t as high as, say, Holliday, or arguably Willits if you think he can grow into plus power. But I think Arquette is a pretty solid bet to be at least an average MLB regular within a couple of years, with the upside of being a Silver Slugger shortstop. (Bleacher Report’s comp here is Troy Tulowitzki, who despite persistent injuries had a far better career than Rentería, for whatever that’s worth.) I also think Arquette’s bonus demands will likely come in under Willits. If the goal is to save some money on the top pick and spread the bonus pool around over multiple rounds, I’d rather go with the higher floor.
I’m really not in love with any of the pitchers in this class. Anderson finished well, but I don’t think that necessarily means he’s going to be a better MLB pitcher than the other arms at the top of the draft. Doyle and Arnold both flashed brilliance but also had significant wobbles this spring. Witherspoon is divisive, with some evaluators considering him a top-six talent in the draft and others mocking him in the middle of the first round. I don’t think any of those four would be a bad pick, but there’s no apparent Paul Skenes in this draft class. The realistic upside, in my opinion, is a mid-rotation starter. That’s a little underwhelming for a 1-1.
Stan J.: My pick is Ethan Holliday. I went back and forth on this from several of the choices here. If his hit tool and summer 2024 numbers were better, he would be the runaway selection. But we have seen Cape Cod stars not do well in the pros.
There is rarely certainty with a draft pick. You have to make sure you don’t pull a Mickey Moniak or Henry Davis or Mark Appel pick. You have to get a future star and this draft group has to pick the best player and score big here.
Steve “Ghost” Mears: Best comp I have for Anderson is watching Max Fried based on body and size and appearance. And my other comp just for repertoire is Max Scherzer and Chris Sale. Anderson has 4 pitches — fastball, slider, changeup and cutter. The fastball averages 94+. He uses that more up in the zone. My only issue is health due to one scare back in May and his TJ surgery back in High School. So sure, you’ll always be nervous taking a pitcher until the day he goes to play for someone else. The one thing I know about Anderson is that he can compete on the biggest stage with a steady heartbeat.
What we have to pick from is the current pool of players and this is a weaker 1st round class but some strength at the top. My pick is from the top of who I see, and the risk factors have to be considered.
I will share that story again from a competing agent (doesn’t rep Eli Willits) who I believe was one of many who tried to rep Willits. I mention Willits because in my due diligence I ask around and he told me that he would draft Willits over Ethan Holliday as the best position player by a sizeable margin.
Best player today might be Seth Hernandez but he is a high school pitcher with years of development and that injury risk, and the 19 year old rules give you only 4 yrs of development time which means that you will probably be developing him on the MLB roster like MacKenzie Gore which means you give up years of control before you get a star. Maybe he goes on the Clayton Kershaw timeline and is an immediate star but that generally doesn’t happen with high school aces. My pick is Kade Anderson if I were to go pitcher, and Eli Willits if I were to go position player.
stever20: Ethan Holliday to me is the best player in the class. Power. Good approach at the plate. Could move House back to SS and take over at 3rd base. And yes, really good bloodlines. Nats shouldn’t overthink things.
Wadlez: The pick Ethan Holliday.
I don’t make this pick for timelines and Holliday has the largest upside in the draft and don’t consider the swing and miss enough to pass here.. When you consider the power and plate discipline, a Wood potential future bat is there.
We need arms like most teams but I don’t make this pick for need.. that said I’d be fine with Anderson if boring. I see a lot to like with Willits also.. Willits is the analytical model pick. Great hit tool, SS, young for the class.
My 1-2-3 is Holliday-Willits-Anderson
6:07 ET and the Washington Nationals pick Eli Willits!
