Harper may be too rich for Nats’ blood

The Washington Nationals’ disappointing season is almost over. Now the big question: Should the Nats let pending free-agent Bryce Harper sign with another team?

I can almost hear kids around the D.C. area who wear Bryce Harper T-shirts screaming: “No way! Bryce should stay a National!”

It’s a tough decision, so let’s take a closer look.

Here are some reasons they should and some reasons they shouldn’t trade him.

Sign Harper: He is a very good player. Harper hits home runs and gets lots of walks. His career on-base-plus-slugging percentage, which measures how often you get on base and how many extra-base hits you get, is .901.

Only six active major-leaguers — including such superstars as Mike Trout, Joey Votto and Giancarlo Stanton — have a higher career OPS than Harper. His OPS for this season is slightly lower, but it’s still among the 15 best.

In addition, Harper turns 26 on Oct. 16. He should be a good player for several more years.

Finally, from all reports, Harper is a good teammate.

Don’t sign Harper: He will be very expensive to sign, possibly costing the team more than US$30 million a year. They’ll have to weigh if they’ll have enough money to keep other quality players, such as third baseman Anthony Rendon.

Another problem is Harper is striking out more often. This season, he has struck out almost 25 per cent of the time.

Finally, the Nats could have a pretty good (and much less expensive) outfield without Harper. Juan Soto is only 19 and looks as if he may become a better hitter than Harper. Victor Robles is another exciting young prospect, while Adam Eaton and Michael A. Taylor are already in the fold.

Overall, it’s a close call, but it may be time to wave goodbye.