Man, this is getting really ugly.
The 82nd game of the year is very special. It's the beginning of the second half of the season. Theoretically, anyway, teams can a set aside a dismal start and say, "From here on in, boys, it's going to be a different story."
The Nationals lost their 82nd game Wednesday afternoon 10-4 with another assortment of rumbling, bumbling, stumbling and tumbling.
The Nationals didn't start a new chapter. They didn't even turn a new page. Their just fleshing out the worst story ever written.
What's that you say? The '62 Mets was a worse team? Well, perhaps. But they were lovable. In fact, their unofficial nickname was the "lovable losers." Mets fans smiled as they got hammered night in and night out.
I'm not smiling, and I don't think you are either.
Look, I've been writing about the Nationals since their first winter in Washington, long before the players donned their "Curly W" caps. I have been so optimistic about the team's future that some readers have taken exception to my rose colored analysis. One commenter said I reminded him of that always-smiling guy on those Encite commercials.
But I've got to tell you, I'm beginning to wonder just exactly what's happening in Nats Town.
Manny Acta continues to trot out raw rookie Ross Detwiler every five days. And every five days, he gets squished like a bug on my windshield. Yes, I see the talent. Yes, I think that once Detwiler figures out his delivery release point, he's going to be a solid major league pitcher.
But he hasn't yet, and I've seen nothing that shows me he's beginning to figure it out.
In Syracuse, former first-round pick J. D. Martin is 8-2 with a 2.14 ERA and a 0.92 WHIP (base runners allowed per inning). Garrett Mock is 4-2, 3.14, but has been near-perfect since he returned to the starting rotation.
Detwiler gives the Nationals no chance to win. Martin and Mock, while not as talented, are a better answer right now.
And boy, do I get a strong case of the shakes when I see Adam Dunn penciled in at first. Dunn is a tremendous power hitter who is terrible at first and almost adequate in left. He has proven time and time again that he doesn't have soft hands or quick feet, which means he isn't a first baseman.
Managers seem to think that slow-footed, power hitting left fielders can be hidden at first. Ted Williams tried it too. In 1968 and '69, Hondo played the equivalent of a full season at first base and committed an outrageous 21 errors. Dunn has played 136 games at first during his career and has made 19 errors.
Adam Dunn belongs in left or in the dugout. Nowhere else.
I could go on forever.
But lets not look backward. There is nothing we can do about the Nationals' 24-58 start. Let's look forward.
What can be done to keep the team from being forever named in the same breath with the aforementioned '62 Mets?
Not much.
Former general manager Jim Bowden had a vision. It wasn't a particularly good one, but at least he had an end game. He collected a bunch of outfielders that he was going to trade in spring, bolstering the relief corps and solidifying the middle infield. But he lost his job and Mike Rizzo took over before he could finish what he started.
Rizzo is going to be a great general manager, but he has a totally different view on how to build a major league baseball team. His moves-at least so far-just don't mesh with Bowden's.
So the Nationals went started the 2009 season with no hope of winning. The bullpen was too thin and the outfield was too thick, and as a result, both areas have underperformed.
All the Nationals can do is to rid themselves of the dead-wood relievers and begin the process of seeing who is, and isn't, ready in their minor league system.
The Nationals have been trying to showcase Austin Kearns and Ronnie Belliard in hopes of finding someone-anyone-who will take them in a trade. I'm afraid that come August 1st, they are going to go the way of Felipe Lopez and Paul LoDuca.
And then the team is going to have to do something that I know they have no intention of doing: fire Manny Acta.
For the last couple of months, several of the players have begun to sleepwalk through the season. Many have suggested that Cristian Guzman's 12 errors are because of declining skills. If that's the case, how do you explain Ryan Zimmerman's 12 errors or the six errors by both Anderson Hernandez and Alberto Gonzalez? Even slick-fielding Nick Johnson has make seven miscues.
Loss after loss after loss has been met with unbridled stoicism by Manny Acta. He's putting his players to sleep. They aren't paying attention. Picture trying to make a long throw to first with Kenny G playing in your head.
Zzzzzzz.
If the Nationals fire Acta and replace him with someone more bellicose, it would be like replacing Kenny G with Aerosmith.
They'd be alert, awake, and aggressive.
I think most of us can live with all the losses, but we can't stand to watch the team sleepwalk through the second half of the season. The Nationals have the talent to win 35 games between now and October, which would give them 59 wins for the season.
In other words, they would duplicate their poor performance from last year.
Wait. That's not a good thing.
But there is really nothing else to do but wait and see what happens. Mike Rizzo's vision of the Nationals is far different from the one Jim Bowden was building. Expect to see wholesale changes on the major league roster over the winter.
What will the team look like come Spring?
I have no idea.
Jesus Flores will be catching. Ryan Zimmerman will be at third. Adam Dunn will man left. John Lannan and Jordan Zimmermann will lead the starting pitching.
Other than that, it's a crapshoot. It's wait-and-see redux.
Now, you may have noticed that this column was written in a meandering style with no rhyme nor reason along with many errors. It was done on purpose.
This one time, I decided to write like the Nationals play.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Sunday, July 5, 2009
July is a telling month in the world of baseball. With the trade deadline coming at the end of the month, contending teams seek to shore up any potential weaknesses by dealing prospects for (usually) short term solutions.
A prime example came just last year, when the Milwaukee Brewers, who surprisingly found themselves in a pennant chase for the first time since the Reagan Administration, traded four of their prized prospects to the Cleveland Indians for star pitcher C. C. Sabathia, who led Milwaukee to the playoffs but became a free agent in the off-season and signed with the Yankees.
But in order for teams like the Yankees and Dodgers and Red Sox and Cardinals to improve in July, other teams have to get worse. Certainly, the Indians improved their future by trading for those Brewers' prospects, but they hurt themselves in the short term.
One need only look at this mornings standings to see that the Indians' 33-49 record is the worst in the American League and third worst in all of baseball.
Sometimes, these star-for-prospects trades do help the wobegone's of the league get better. In 2002, the Montreal Expos were in a pennant chase and desperately needed pitching. They traded for Cleveland all-star Bartolo Colon, who's 10-4, 2.55 effort did improve the club for the rest of the year. But who did they give up?
Oh, no one special. Just all-star Grady Sizemore (.268-33-90 last year), all-star Brandon Phillips (.261-21-78) and Cy Young Award winner Cliff Lee (22-3, 2.54).
But for every steal, there is a dud. In 2006, the Nationals traded their best pitcher, Livan Hernandez, to the Arizona Diamondbacks for pitchers Matt Chico and Garrett Mock. After a promising but unspectacular rookie year in 2007 (7-9, 4.63), Chico underwent elbow surgery last season and is currently trying to make a comeback at 'AA' Harrisburg. Mock is a on-again off-again starter who was a reliever but is again a starter for the 'AAA' Syracuse Chiefs.
So with less than a month to go before the trade deadline, where does all this leave the Washington Nationals? Their 23-55 record is as bad as it gets, and while they aren't on a collision course with the 1962 Mets, it's going to be a near miss.
In an interview with Washington Post beat writer Chico Harlen yesterday, acting general manager Mike Rizzo said that he has "no plans" for a July fire sale. Uh-huh. That sounds a lot like Rudy Guliani last week when he said he had "no plans" to run for Governor.
With that in mind, let's take a look at the Nationals' position players most likely to draw interest from other teams this month:
1B: Nick Johnson (.295-5-34)
There is no way Johnson will be with the team come August 1st. His four-year contract ends this year and the team won't take another chance on their oft-injured first baseman. For his career, Johnson has been available for just 57% of his team's regular season games. He's a disaster waiting to happen. Again.
If that's not bad enough, there is little chance that the Nationals would receive a compensatory pick in next year's amateur draft if he's signed by another team. Their only viable option is to trade him now.
However, the Nationals have no one in the minor leagues who is even remotely close to being ready for the major leagues. Bill Rinehart ('AA' Harrisburg) and Chris Marrero ('A' Potomac) are both years away. Adam Dunn would be Johnson's likely successor, but he's even a worse defender at first than he is in the outfield.
If that's even possible.
SS: Cristian Guzman (.316-3-21)
In his first year with Washington (2005), Guzman didn't reach .200 until September and finished the year with a .260 on-base percentage. He missed the entire 2006 season with injury and played just 46 games in 2007. He came into his own last year, however, batting .316 with nine home runs.
Enter Jim Bowden. On the basis of one good year in four, he bestowed upon the 30-year-old a two-year, $16 million dollar contract, saying that the shortstop gave the Nationals a "home team discount" to sign.
Let me see. A career .273 hitter signs for $8 million a year at a discount but Adam Dunn, who just hit his 300th career home run, signed for $10 million a year.
Make sense? Didn't think so.
While Guzman is still hitting well (.316 entering Sunday's game against the Braves), his on-base percentage is down and is fast becoming a defensive liability. His fielding percentage in 2009 is the worst of his career and is a full ten-points lower than the league average.
Will anyone want an overpriced shortstop whose defensive skills are in decline? Probably, but what the Nationals might get in return wouldn't be much more than a mid-level prospect.
LF: Adam Dunn (.265-22-59)
In his first year with the Nationals, Dunn is on pace to hit .265-45-120 with a .403 on-base percentage. True, he's a liability in left (and I'm being kind here) but the city has a history of bad fielding, home run hitting left fielders who mesmerize the fans. Do you think Bob Short would have been able to leave Washington in one piece if he had traded Frank Howard?
No one in Nats Town would bat an eye if the Nationals were to trade Nick Johnson or Cristian Guzman this month. Both moves would make sense. But by trading Dunn-and there are many insiders who suggest this could happen-the Nationals would be throwing in the towel for not just this year but 2010 as well.
And that would be a bad move. The team's starting pitching has the potential to become an outstanding rotation as early as next season.
John Lannan has proven he's a solid major league starter. Jordan Zimmermann looks better every time he takes the mound. Scott Olsen's past production-and his first start since returning from the DL-shows that he has been and will again be a capable number three starter. By next spring, the Nationals should have-and I pray every night that it happens-Steven Strasburg in the rotation as well.
That means that the team only needs one success story from Shairon Martis, Ross Detwiler, Craig Stammen or Colin Balestar and they could have a very solid rotation.
If the Nationals keep Dunn, and add one more proven major league talent, 2010 just might be something special.
RF-Josh Willingham (.286-9-20)
Willingham, obtained from the Marlins for Emilo Bonifacio, should have been penciled into the lineup on opening day and left there. Instead, Manny Acta played a game of mix-n-match in the outfield, and Willingham suffered from a lack of playing time.
Once Austin Kearns and Elijah Dukes flamed out, however, Willingham began to play every day and his production blossomed. If he had played regularly all year, Willingham would be on pace to hit .286-30-80. Instead, he's rumored to be heading out of town.
Willingham is under team control for two more years. He's averaged 25 homers and 85 RBI over a 162 game season throughout his career. He's what the Nationals hoped Austin Kearns would be, though admittedly, his defense isn't spectacular.
And he's a solid clubhouse presence.
And yet he could be on the trade block because of Adam Dunn. The Nationals have two slow-footed power hitting outfielders on a team that can afford just one. So if Willingham gets traded, it's because his team screwed up, not him.
Willie Harris, Ronnie Belliard and one of the team's second-string catchers, either Josh Bard or Wil Nieves, are also trade possibilities, though none of them would bring the Nationals much more than organizational players.
In the coming days, the Nationals will make a statement to their fans. If they trade Nick Johnson or Cristian Guzman, they will say that they are making prudent, measured decisions for the long-term viability of their team.
If they trade Josh Willingham, they will be admitting that the team was doomed to fail because management rested the team's season on hope, prayer and a series of best-case scenarios that didn't pan out.
And if the Nationals trade Adam Dunn, they team will be acknowledging a distasteful similarity between them and the Soviet Union of the 1930's. Nationals fans, just like the citizens of Soviet Russia, will be forced to sit back and watch a succession of 5-year plans come and go, each wiping out the last, with little hope that anything concrete and positive will come from them.
July is usually for vacations at the beach, fishing in the mountains, and a day at the ball park. For the Washington Nationals, July will be for letting its fans know-once and for all-if they intend to become a major league baseball team.
I'm not sure I can watch.
A prime example came just last year, when the Milwaukee Brewers, who surprisingly found themselves in a pennant chase for the first time since the Reagan Administration, traded four of their prized prospects to the Cleveland Indians for star pitcher C. C. Sabathia, who led Milwaukee to the playoffs but became a free agent in the off-season and signed with the Yankees.
But in order for teams like the Yankees and Dodgers and Red Sox and Cardinals to improve in July, other teams have to get worse. Certainly, the Indians improved their future by trading for those Brewers' prospects, but they hurt themselves in the short term.
One need only look at this mornings standings to see that the Indians' 33-49 record is the worst in the American League and third worst in all of baseball.
Sometimes, these star-for-prospects trades do help the wobegone's of the league get better. In 2002, the Montreal Expos were in a pennant chase and desperately needed pitching. They traded for Cleveland all-star Bartolo Colon, who's 10-4, 2.55 effort did improve the club for the rest of the year. But who did they give up?
Oh, no one special. Just all-star Grady Sizemore (.268-33-90 last year), all-star Brandon Phillips (.261-21-78) and Cy Young Award winner Cliff Lee (22-3, 2.54).
But for every steal, there is a dud. In 2006, the Nationals traded their best pitcher, Livan Hernandez, to the Arizona Diamondbacks for pitchers Matt Chico and Garrett Mock. After a promising but unspectacular rookie year in 2007 (7-9, 4.63), Chico underwent elbow surgery last season and is currently trying to make a comeback at 'AA' Harrisburg. Mock is a on-again off-again starter who was a reliever but is again a starter for the 'AAA' Syracuse Chiefs.
So with less than a month to go before the trade deadline, where does all this leave the Washington Nationals? Their 23-55 record is as bad as it gets, and while they aren't on a collision course with the 1962 Mets, it's going to be a near miss.
In an interview with Washington Post beat writer Chico Harlen yesterday, acting general manager Mike Rizzo said that he has "no plans" for a July fire sale. Uh-huh. That sounds a lot like Rudy Guliani last week when he said he had "no plans" to run for Governor.
With that in mind, let's take a look at the Nationals' position players most likely to draw interest from other teams this month:
1B: Nick Johnson (.295-5-34)
There is no way Johnson will be with the team come August 1st. His four-year contract ends this year and the team won't take another chance on their oft-injured first baseman. For his career, Johnson has been available for just 57% of his team's regular season games. He's a disaster waiting to happen. Again.
If that's not bad enough, there is little chance that the Nationals would receive a compensatory pick in next year's amateur draft if he's signed by another team. Their only viable option is to trade him now.
However, the Nationals have no one in the minor leagues who is even remotely close to being ready for the major leagues. Bill Rinehart ('AA' Harrisburg) and Chris Marrero ('A' Potomac) are both years away. Adam Dunn would be Johnson's likely successor, but he's even a worse defender at first than he is in the outfield.
If that's even possible.
SS: Cristian Guzman (.316-3-21)
In his first year with Washington (2005), Guzman didn't reach .200 until September and finished the year with a .260 on-base percentage. He missed the entire 2006 season with injury and played just 46 games in 2007. He came into his own last year, however, batting .316 with nine home runs.
Enter Jim Bowden. On the basis of one good year in four, he bestowed upon the 30-year-old a two-year, $16 million dollar contract, saying that the shortstop gave the Nationals a "home team discount" to sign.
Let me see. A career .273 hitter signs for $8 million a year at a discount but Adam Dunn, who just hit his 300th career home run, signed for $10 million a year.
Make sense? Didn't think so.
While Guzman is still hitting well (.316 entering Sunday's game against the Braves), his on-base percentage is down and is fast becoming a defensive liability. His fielding percentage in 2009 is the worst of his career and is a full ten-points lower than the league average.
Will anyone want an overpriced shortstop whose defensive skills are in decline? Probably, but what the Nationals might get in return wouldn't be much more than a mid-level prospect.
LF: Adam Dunn (.265-22-59)
In his first year with the Nationals, Dunn is on pace to hit .265-45-120 with a .403 on-base percentage. True, he's a liability in left (and I'm being kind here) but the city has a history of bad fielding, home run hitting left fielders who mesmerize the fans. Do you think Bob Short would have been able to leave Washington in one piece if he had traded Frank Howard?
No one in Nats Town would bat an eye if the Nationals were to trade Nick Johnson or Cristian Guzman this month. Both moves would make sense. But by trading Dunn-and there are many insiders who suggest this could happen-the Nationals would be throwing in the towel for not just this year but 2010 as well.
And that would be a bad move. The team's starting pitching has the potential to become an outstanding rotation as early as next season.
John Lannan has proven he's a solid major league starter. Jordan Zimmermann looks better every time he takes the mound. Scott Olsen's past production-and his first start since returning from the DL-shows that he has been and will again be a capable number three starter. By next spring, the Nationals should have-and I pray every night that it happens-Steven Strasburg in the rotation as well.
That means that the team only needs one success story from Shairon Martis, Ross Detwiler, Craig Stammen or Colin Balestar and they could have a very solid rotation.
If the Nationals keep Dunn, and add one more proven major league talent, 2010 just might be something special.
RF-Josh Willingham (.286-9-20)
Willingham, obtained from the Marlins for Emilo Bonifacio, should have been penciled into the lineup on opening day and left there. Instead, Manny Acta played a game of mix-n-match in the outfield, and Willingham suffered from a lack of playing time.
Once Austin Kearns and Elijah Dukes flamed out, however, Willingham began to play every day and his production blossomed. If he had played regularly all year, Willingham would be on pace to hit .286-30-80. Instead, he's rumored to be heading out of town.
Willingham is under team control for two more years. He's averaged 25 homers and 85 RBI over a 162 game season throughout his career. He's what the Nationals hoped Austin Kearns would be, though admittedly, his defense isn't spectacular.
And he's a solid clubhouse presence.
And yet he could be on the trade block because of Adam Dunn. The Nationals have two slow-footed power hitting outfielders on a team that can afford just one. So if Willingham gets traded, it's because his team screwed up, not him.
Willie Harris, Ronnie Belliard and one of the team's second-string catchers, either Josh Bard or Wil Nieves, are also trade possibilities, though none of them would bring the Nationals much more than organizational players.
In the coming days, the Nationals will make a statement to their fans. If they trade Nick Johnson or Cristian Guzman, they will say that they are making prudent, measured decisions for the long-term viability of their team.
If they trade Josh Willingham, they will be admitting that the team was doomed to fail because management rested the team's season on hope, prayer and a series of best-case scenarios that didn't pan out.
And if the Nationals trade Adam Dunn, they team will be acknowledging a distasteful similarity between them and the Soviet Union of the 1930's. Nationals fans, just like the citizens of Soviet Russia, will be forced to sit back and watch a succession of 5-year plans come and go, each wiping out the last, with little hope that anything concrete and positive will come from them.
July is usually for vacations at the beach, fishing in the mountains, and a day at the ball park. For the Washington Nationals, July will be for letting its fans know-once and for all-if they intend to become a major league baseball team.
I'm not sure I can watch.
Friday, July 3, 2009
Since the beginning of the season, I've been watching the Washington Nationals play a very unique brand of baseball. Most of us wrote off last year's 59-102 debacle as a perfect storm, a confluence of off-years, green pitching and bad luck.
I mean, there is no way that the Nationals would repeat last year's .366 winning percent in 2009, right?
Right.
Heading into Friday's game with Atlanta, the Nationals are on pace to win just 48 games, and are currently eight games ahead of Cleveland for the "honor" of securing the first pick in the MLB amateur draft for the second season in a row.
The Nationals are a much better team this year. Nick Johnson (.295-5-33) is healthy and outperforming the cabal of first baseman that the Nationals trotted out last season. Anderson Hernandez (.256-1-21) is playing far better than Felipe Lopez did a year ago. Cristian Guzman (.318-3-18) continues to provide strong offense at short and Ryan Zimmerman (.296-13-44) is making fans forget about his injury riddled off year in 2008.
Adam Dunn (.260-20-56) and Josh Willingham (.288-9-18) are marked improvements over Ryan Langerhans and Austin Kearns from last year. And the pre-slump Elijah Dukes and the currently over-achieving Willie Harris in center have made it so very easy to forget about the since-departed Lastings Milledge. Only catcher hasn't been upgraded, and that's only because of Jesus Flores' injury.
And while we can moan and groan about the bullpen, it was just as bad last year. In 2008, the starters that followed John Lannan were Tim Redding (10-11, 4.95), Odalis Perez (7-12, 4.34), Jason Bergman (2-11, 5.09) and Colin Balestar (3-7, 5.51). Jordan Zimmermann, Shairon Martis, Ross Detwiler and Craig Stammen, though all green, have all shown flashes of brilliance and have pitched no worse than last year's cadre of starters. And Scott Olsen, even with his injury problems, was an upgrade from 2008.
And while the defense is still bad, at least it's not the very worst in the National League like last year. Currently, it's just the second worst.
So why have the Nationals gotten worse? Why have they gone from being an embarrassment to a laughing stock?
A few years back, I was a car salesman for our local General Motors dealership. Over the previous four years, I had been the top salesman each year. The other salesman were all career guys and the dealership made a lot of money.
One day, the owner retired and his son took over the business. He forced out the old-time sales managers and brought in a bunch of young, high-pressure guys. The sales staff didn't trust the new leadership, and with good reason. They were the prototypical jerks you hate to deal with when you try to buy a new car.
Within six months, my sales declined from 15 a month to seven. The other salespeople had similar drops in sales. We would have morning meetings where we'd be excoriated by the managers, threatened with our jobs and made to feel totally worthless. Eventually, the owner got wise and "retired" his son, got rid of the high pressure and returned the dealership to its former ways.
And our sales doubled.
See, if those dirt-bags (and they were) had fired all of us and brought in dirt-bag salesman, they would have prospered. But we were low key, low pressure, and unable to work in the environment that was created.
That's the problem I see with the Nationals. The players have a low-pressure manager but require a high-octane personality to lead them. The team has an "AC" manager but the team runs on "DC" current.
In other words, they don't have a ying and a yang.
It's ying ying.
By this point, most Nationals' fans have grown weary of manager Manny Acta and many refuse to take the team seriously until a change is made.
And they're right, of course.
And the Lerners, and team president Stan Kasten, and sort-of-GM Mike Rizzo see in Acta a very intelligent, very able, very young manager who has all the makings of a winner.
And they're right too.
But as things currently stand, the Nationals are a Ford SUV held together with parts from a 1987 Yugo.
It's just not going to run properly.
So Stan and Mike and Mark and Ted have a decision to make. They can either get rid of Manny Acta bring in a manager with less stoicism and more vitriol and maybe they can mimic the Colorado Rockies for the rest of the season.
Or they can keep "Manager Manny" and turn over the roster, filling it with players whose pulse must be checked on a regular basis for signs of life.
You know: "Dude, we just got a walk-off homer. Cool. What's for dinner?"
It's one or the other.
So who's to blame? Why none other than Smiley Gonzalez.
If former general manager Jim Bowden had not been forced out during spring training because of "Smileygate," things would be very different right now. It was obvious that the Nationals were an unfinished product when spring training began. Bowden had collected six starting outfielders and was going to trade for starting pitching from a position of strength before the season started.
However, Bowden lost his job and the Nationals were only willing to give Mike Rizzo a soft endorsement as their sort-of, pseudo, for-the-time-being general manager. Rizzo didn't have the gravitas to make any dynamic trades, and because he had a differing view of how to build a team, was unwilling to continue build the team Bowden style.
As a result, the Nationals are a hodge-podge of mismatched parts.
Now don't get me wrong; I haven't retreated one inch from my "the future is bright for the Nationals" mindset. There is enough talent in the minor leagues to make a difference, though I wish it was a little farther along. The offense is good enough, and the starting pitching has the potential to be somewhere between special and stellar.
All Nationals' fans need do is show a little patience. If Mike Rizzo is bold and reshuffles the roster, or fires the coaching staff, then all is well on the S. S. National. No icebergs are in sight. There is enough talent to make a significant turnaround in 2010.
If, however, Rizzo becomes a seller and trades Nick Johnson, Adam Dunn and Josh Willingham for prospects, well, that's a totally different story.
But I'm willing to wait until the July 31st trading deadline before throwing my fit.
Are you?
I mean, there is no way that the Nationals would repeat last year's .366 winning percent in 2009, right?
Right.
Heading into Friday's game with Atlanta, the Nationals are on pace to win just 48 games, and are currently eight games ahead of Cleveland for the "honor" of securing the first pick in the MLB amateur draft for the second season in a row.
The Nationals are a much better team this year. Nick Johnson (.295-5-33) is healthy and outperforming the cabal of first baseman that the Nationals trotted out last season. Anderson Hernandez (.256-1-21) is playing far better than Felipe Lopez did a year ago. Cristian Guzman (.318-3-18) continues to provide strong offense at short and Ryan Zimmerman (.296-13-44) is making fans forget about his injury riddled off year in 2008.
Adam Dunn (.260-20-56) and Josh Willingham (.288-9-18) are marked improvements over Ryan Langerhans and Austin Kearns from last year. And the pre-slump Elijah Dukes and the currently over-achieving Willie Harris in center have made it so very easy to forget about the since-departed Lastings Milledge. Only catcher hasn't been upgraded, and that's only because of Jesus Flores' injury.
And while we can moan and groan about the bullpen, it was just as bad last year. In 2008, the starters that followed John Lannan were Tim Redding (10-11, 4.95), Odalis Perez (7-12, 4.34), Jason Bergman (2-11, 5.09) and Colin Balestar (3-7, 5.51). Jordan Zimmermann, Shairon Martis, Ross Detwiler and Craig Stammen, though all green, have all shown flashes of brilliance and have pitched no worse than last year's cadre of starters. And Scott Olsen, even with his injury problems, was an upgrade from 2008.
And while the defense is still bad, at least it's not the very worst in the National League like last year. Currently, it's just the second worst.
So why have the Nationals gotten worse? Why have they gone from being an embarrassment to a laughing stock?
A few years back, I was a car salesman for our local General Motors dealership. Over the previous four years, I had been the top salesman each year. The other salesman were all career guys and the dealership made a lot of money.
One day, the owner retired and his son took over the business. He forced out the old-time sales managers and brought in a bunch of young, high-pressure guys. The sales staff didn't trust the new leadership, and with good reason. They were the prototypical jerks you hate to deal with when you try to buy a new car.
Within six months, my sales declined from 15 a month to seven. The other salespeople had similar drops in sales. We would have morning meetings where we'd be excoriated by the managers, threatened with our jobs and made to feel totally worthless. Eventually, the owner got wise and "retired" his son, got rid of the high pressure and returned the dealership to its former ways.
And our sales doubled.
See, if those dirt-bags (and they were) had fired all of us and brought in dirt-bag salesman, they would have prospered. But we were low key, low pressure, and unable to work in the environment that was created.
That's the problem I see with the Nationals. The players have a low-pressure manager but require a high-octane personality to lead them. The team has an "AC" manager but the team runs on "DC" current.
In other words, they don't have a ying and a yang.
It's ying ying.
By this point, most Nationals' fans have grown weary of manager Manny Acta and many refuse to take the team seriously until a change is made.
And they're right, of course.
And the Lerners, and team president Stan Kasten, and sort-of-GM Mike Rizzo see in Acta a very intelligent, very able, very young manager who has all the makings of a winner.
And they're right too.
But as things currently stand, the Nationals are a Ford SUV held together with parts from a 1987 Yugo.
It's just not going to run properly.
So Stan and Mike and Mark and Ted have a decision to make. They can either get rid of Manny Acta bring in a manager with less stoicism and more vitriol and maybe they can mimic the Colorado Rockies for the rest of the season.
Or they can keep "Manager Manny" and turn over the roster, filling it with players whose pulse must be checked on a regular basis for signs of life.
You know: "Dude, we just got a walk-off homer. Cool. What's for dinner?"
It's one or the other.
So who's to blame? Why none other than Smiley Gonzalez.
If former general manager Jim Bowden had not been forced out during spring training because of "Smileygate," things would be very different right now. It was obvious that the Nationals were an unfinished product when spring training began. Bowden had collected six starting outfielders and was going to trade for starting pitching from a position of strength before the season started.
However, Bowden lost his job and the Nationals were only willing to give Mike Rizzo a soft endorsement as their sort-of, pseudo, for-the-time-being general manager. Rizzo didn't have the gravitas to make any dynamic trades, and because he had a differing view of how to build a team, was unwilling to continue build the team Bowden style.
As a result, the Nationals are a hodge-podge of mismatched parts.
Now don't get me wrong; I haven't retreated one inch from my "the future is bright for the Nationals" mindset. There is enough talent in the minor leagues to make a difference, though I wish it was a little farther along. The offense is good enough, and the starting pitching has the potential to be somewhere between special and stellar.
All Nationals' fans need do is show a little patience. If Mike Rizzo is bold and reshuffles the roster, or fires the coaching staff, then all is well on the S. S. National. No icebergs are in sight. There is enough talent to make a significant turnaround in 2010.
If, however, Rizzo becomes a seller and trades Nick Johnson, Adam Dunn and Josh Willingham for prospects, well, that's a totally different story.
But I'm willing to wait until the July 31st trading deadline before throwing my fit.
Are you?
Monday, June 8, 2009
Well, the Major League Baseball amateur draft is finally upon us, and regardless of all the sleight-of-hand and pseudo-uncertainty coming from the Washington Nationals, don't bother tuning in to the draft broadcast, hoping to catch some suspense.
Over the past few months, there have been hundreds of articles written about Steven Strasburg the man, the pitcher, and the pick. Some say the Nationals will be damned if they draft him while others say they'll be damned if they don't. He'll be the next Nolan Ryan, or he'll be the next David Clyde.
The reality of it all is this: While no one knows if he'll ever make it to the major leagues, he probably will. And while no one knows if he'll become a star, he probably will.
What is a certainty, however, is that the Nationals have to draft him, due in part for who he should become, but mainly for what he's already done.
Steven Strasburg was just a month into his sophomore season at San Diego State University. Though he had a superb freshman year with the Aztecs, Strasburg had been the team’s closer and wasn’t generally well known around the baseball world.
But now he was a starter, and was no longer cloaked in baseball invisibility.
A week earlier, the 19-year-old took a perfect game into the 7th inning against TCU before settling on a one-hitter while striking out 13.
Two weeks earlier, Strasburg struck out 23 Utah Utes while facing the minimum 27 batters, again giving up just one lonely hit.
And now thousands of fans had packed San Diego’s Tony Gwynn Stadium, but they weren’t there to watch the Aztecs play another little known Mountain West Conference foe.
They were there to watch Steven Strasburg.
Behind him was a young fan taping a giant “K” to the outfield fence each time Strasburg fanned a batter. In front of him was a buxom co-ed, sitting behind home plate, rocking side to side, holding a large white sign above her head.
“Yo mama let u date?”
No longer was Steven Strasburg just a tall, gangly kid from suburban San Diego who was playing his favorite sport solely for the love of the game.
He was now a hot commodity, someone who would likely be worth upwards of $10 million dollars within a year, and certainly a major league pitcher by the time he was 21.
His buddies and girl friends were now being pushed aside by financial advisers, investment counselors, and hangers-on.
The sophomore had a posse.
And Scott Boras' claws were already deep into the young pitcher's future.
“With the first pick in the 2009 Major League Baseball amateur draft, the Washington Nationals select San Diego State University pitcher Steven Strasburg.”
Forget about it. It’s a done deal.
Well, of course there is a small chance that something will happen and Strasburg won’t be the Nationals’ pick, but it would have to involve things like prison or space aliens.
Steven Strasburg is that good.
There was never a question that Strasburg was going to be a special ball player.
He had a 1.68 ERA in his senior year of high school, striking out 74 batters in 62 innings. He threw seven complete games in his senior year alone, an unheard of number for a high school player.
He could have played college ball anywhere he wanted. His arm was recruited by most schools in the west and his mind was recruited by Stanford and the Ivy League schools in the East.
But in the end, he chose San Diego State, his hometown school and his parent's alma mater.
And having the chance to be coached by Tony Gwynn certainly helped.
A starter in high school, Strasburg was converted into the Aztec’s closer his freshman year.
He was solid in that role but was short of dominant, going 1-3, 2.43 in 25 appearances. He allowed just four hits per nine innings, struck out 11 per nine and allowed less than one base runner per inning. His batting-average-against was a minuscule .143.
The only real chink in Strasburg’s armor in 2007 was his control; he allowed almost four walks per nine innings.
Strasburg was named the Mountain West Conference Freshman of the Year.
He was moved into the starting rotation prior to the start of 2008, and the rest, as they say, is history.
Strasburg went 8-3, 1.57 as a sophomore. He allowed just five hits per nine innings (sixth best in the nation), upped his strikeouts to 12 per nine and lowered his walks to just one per nine.
His batting-average-against was .136, one of the very best in America.
He was named the Mountain West Conference Pitcher of The Week seven times, including five weeks in a row.
In two seasons, pitching against major college competition, Strasburg gave up just one home run.
Wow.
And then he got even better.
He pitched in an exhibition against Team USA, and allowed no hits while striking out seven in three innings.
Playing for Team USA, Strasburg went 4-0, 0.88, striking out 62 and walking seven in 47 innings. He pitched in the Olympics and finished with a 2.45 ERA, pitching against both the Chinese and the Cubans.
He was the only amateur on a team full of professionals.
Do I need to go on?
Yes, I believe I do.
Lincoln Hamilton, a writer for projectprospect.com, listed Strasburg as the best college pitcher in more than a decade.
Well, Strasburg or Mark Prior. He just can't decide which is the more complete package.
Either way, he's in elite company. He includes Strasburg in a select group that includes Tampa's David Price, San Francisco's Tim Lincecum, Los Angeles' Jared Weaver, Cleveland's Kerry Wood, and Prior.
When compared to the top college pitchers of all time (per Hamilton), Strasburg has the lowest WHIP, the lowest home runs allowed per nine innings, the third best strikeouts per nine and the second lowest walks per nine within the group.
So why is Steven Strasburg so good?
Because he can make a baseball dance.
His fastball touches 99 mph and cruises at 96-97 mph during a game. But that’s not his strikeout pitch. His slider looks just like his fastball but dies late and ends up in the catcher’s mitt before the batter realizes what he saw.
Strasburg’s best pitch (how can a 99 mph fastball not be his best pitch?) is his “plus-plus” breaking ball that has a two plane break.
Bats just can’t seem to find it.
Thebaseballcube.com has a unique scouting system that places a hard number on predetermined statistical categories. For pitchers, they use control, strikeouts and efficiency.
Johan Santana, perhaps the best pitcher in the major leagues since 2003, has the following scouting numbers (based on a 1-100 scale): control: 85, strikeouts: 95, efficiency: 98.
Take a look at Strasburg's numbers: control: 96, strikeouts: 100, efficiency: 100.
Hmmmm.
Now, I'm not saying Strasburg will be as successful as Santana at the major league level. I am saying, though, that Strasburg has the talent to be even better than Santana.
But there has to be drawbacks, right? I mean, all pitchers have drawbacks.
Well, no. Not really. But there might be.
His mechanics are a concern.
His elbow is positioned farther back then one would like during the “scap-load” phase of his delivery. This places too much stress on his arm and could lead to the same type of troubles that Kerry Wood and Mark Prior have experienced.
There is also too much recoil in his follow through, and he completes his delivery standing up.
This may indicate that Strasburg, like Kerry Wood and Mark Prior before him, may have problems keeping his arm sound and strong.
The problem is that no one dares tinker with the premier pitcher in college today. Nationals' fans know that Ross Detwiler's troubles this past year were a direct result of the team changing his mechanics, hoping to prevent him from damaging his arm early in his career.
Would the Nationals retard Strasburg's growth in the short term for his long term success?
I don't know. I hope not.
Those questions not withstanding, pitchers like Steven Strasburg come along once every decade or so. There is a chance that he’ll develop his arm trouble later in his career, but it’s a chance the Nationals must take.
And let’s not forget that the chance of the team holding on to Strasburg once he is a free agent is almost zero.
Scott Boras is his agent, after all.
Memo to Washington Nationals: Draft Strasburg with your No. 1 pick in June and then hand a blank check to Scott Boras and bend over.
Having not signed Aaron Crow last year, Boras knows that it would be a public relations nightmare for the team not to sign Strasburg and sign him quickly.
From a dollars perspective, it's going to get ugly.
Once signed, give Strasburg a plane ticket to Washington and put him in the starting rotation.
Forget about his delivery. Forget about the future. Wind him up and point him towards the mound and watch the wins pile up.
With Steven Strasburg, the Washington Nationals could actually have one of the strongest rotations in the National League in just a year or so.
Scott Olsen and John Lannan have have been successful at the major league level and both will be just 25 during the 2009 season. Jordan Zimmermann has the chance to be a true No. 1 starter, and Strasburg is a No. 1 starter.
That leaves one spot in the rotation, and the Nationals have several young pitchers able to fill it. Whether it's Shairon Martis, Collin Balester, Colton Willems, Ross Detwiler, Josh Smoker, Matt Chico, or Tyler Clippard filling that spot, the Nationals will have five special arms in the rotation for the first time.
Ever.
"The Plan" is less than a year away from finally leaving the station, and Steven Strasburg will be the engineer driving that train.
And watch out: Strasburg won't be stopping for disbelievers.
Friday, June 5, 2009
Do you remember retired Admiral James Stockdale, who in 1992 was Ross Perot's running mate in that year's Presidential election?
I will never forget his deer-in-the-headlight stare into the television camera during the Vice Presidential debate. He leaned over the podium and said to the American people in a gravely voice, "Who am I? Why am I here?"
Sometimes, that's just how I feel.
I'm not a writer; I'm a high school history teacher. My command of the English language is no better than any of you who read what I write. I mean, why would anyone take time out of their busy day to read what I have to say about the Washington Nationals when they could just as easily read what real journalists have to say about the team.
But as I was reading Thomas Boswell's column in the Washington Post this morning, I remembered exactly who I am and why I'm here. Those of us who moonlight as sportswriters here at bleacherrepot.com-I'll call us fanjouralists-are the Radio Free Europe and Voice of America of the sports world.
Paid journalists-writers like the aforementioned Boswell-don't always report on what we fans want to hear. And sometimes, what they report is their subjective opinion couched in a blanket of perceived objectivity.
Twenty years ago, Tracy Ringolsby or Dick Young or Howard Cosell would write an article and we had no way of knowing if they were being honest with us. Today, each column is subject to introspection, vivisection and fact checking, all done by an on-line Army of unpaid seekers of the truth.
People like the writers at Bleacher Report.
Take that column by Thomas Boswell for example. As a young man, I began reading his articles when the Washington Redskins finally started to win some games (thank you George Allen). I would run down the stairs on Monday morning and snatch the Washington Post off of the porch, checking to make sure Boswell's byline was on the story before munching a bowl of Rice Chex while reading every word.
He was my only conduit to Sonny Jurgenson, Billy Kilmer, Larry Brown and Chris Hanburger.
He wasn't God, but he was close.
But see, I had to believe what he told me; I had no reason to question him and no way to verify what he said.
But today, the path between fan and team isn't just a single, unpaved road traveled only by a single, anointed reporter. Now we have the information superhighway with it's ten-lane blacktops and maglev mass transit system.
Now, we put into use my all-time favorite quote from former President Ronald Reagan.
"Trust, but verify"
And so I trust men like Thomas Boswell, but I also verify. And, today at least, what he wrote wasn't pretty.
In the beginning of his article ("Route To the Bottom? It Starts at the Top"), Boswell makes the tired and unfair comparison between this year's Nationals and the 1962 New York Mets, the model of franchise futility.
But there is no honest comparison, save of course the number of Mets' losses that year (120) and the projected losses for the Nationals this year (117). The Mets were a rag-tag, moribund group of has-beens and never-will be's. Only one of them-17-year-old Ed Kranepool-is still remembered by Mets' fans today (though to be fair, pitcher Vinegar Bend Mizell went on to become a United States Congressman).
The Nationals' roster is full of players that other teams lust after. Jesus Flores, Nick Johnson, Ryan Zimmerman, Adam Dunn, Elijah Dukes and Jordan Zimmermann are just some of the team's young talent around which a winner can be built.
So why the comparison, Boz?
Referring to the team's "blueprint of broken promises," Boswell points to the Nationals' refusal to resign Alfonso Soriano following the 2006 season.
So Tom, you think the Nationals should have resigned him?
For his $18 million a year salary ($136 million total), Soriano has averaged .283-25-57 with a .334 on-base percentage for the Chicago Cubs.
Do you hink the Nationals would have paid that much to Soriano and still been willing to plunk $15-20 million down for Steven Strasburg this summer?
He also complained about Stan Kasten and "The Plan," saying that if Kasten was truly copying the Braves model that he created, the team would be signing many more free agents. He referenced the 1991 signings of Sid Bream, Rafael Belliard, Terry Pendleton and Otis Nixon as proof that the Braves would sign badly needed players, but the Nationals won't.
Oh, Boz ....
Kasten as repeatedly promised that when the Nationals were ready to contend, the Lerner family would happily pony up the resources to sign the "final pieces" for a contending Nationals' team.
Memo to Boz: the Nationals aren't ready to contend yet.
If you'll notice, Boswell didn't mention that in those developing years, from 1988-1990, Kasten didn't sign anyone. He waited until the team was ready to compete before signing those veteran players players.
If Boswell wants to see Stan Kasten do in Washington what he did in Atlanta, he need only open his eyes.
The Nationals, just like the Braves, have refrained from signing big name free agents because they aren't ready to win. Once the young pitching staff matures, I'm sure we'll see the Nationals make the same kind of moves that the Braves did two decades ago.
Look, I'm in no way suggesting that Tom Boswell and other writers shouldn't be subjective in their writing, but they sure should be honest. Sports fans today are far more knowledgable and have access to all of sports history at their finger tips. It's almost impossible to slip a curve ball by them anymore.
The Washington Nationals are facing so many real problems these days that they don't have time to defend themselves against this neverending silly symphony. And that's where the Bleacher Reporters come in.
We read. We research. We evaluate. We fact check.
And then we give you our view. Sure, it's subjective at times, and not always wholly accurate.
But it gives you, the reader, a second opinion.
I hope this isn't copyrighted but, we report, you decide.
I will never forget his deer-in-the-headlight stare into the television camera during the Vice Presidential debate. He leaned over the podium and said to the American people in a gravely voice, "Who am I? Why am I here?"
Sometimes, that's just how I feel.
I'm not a writer; I'm a high school history teacher. My command of the English language is no better than any of you who read what I write. I mean, why would anyone take time out of their busy day to read what I have to say about the Washington Nationals when they could just as easily read what real journalists have to say about the team.
But as I was reading Thomas Boswell's column in the Washington Post this morning, I remembered exactly who I am and why I'm here. Those of us who moonlight as sportswriters here at bleacherrepot.com-I'll call us fanjouralists-are the Radio Free Europe and Voice of America of the sports world.
Paid journalists-writers like the aforementioned Boswell-don't always report on what we fans want to hear. And sometimes, what they report is their subjective opinion couched in a blanket of perceived objectivity.
Twenty years ago, Tracy Ringolsby or Dick Young or Howard Cosell would write an article and we had no way of knowing if they were being honest with us. Today, each column is subject to introspection, vivisection and fact checking, all done by an on-line Army of unpaid seekers of the truth.
People like the writers at Bleacher Report.
Take that column by Thomas Boswell for example. As a young man, I began reading his articles when the Washington Redskins finally started to win some games (thank you George Allen). I would run down the stairs on Monday morning and snatch the Washington Post off of the porch, checking to make sure Boswell's byline was on the story before munching a bowl of Rice Chex while reading every word.
He was my only conduit to Sonny Jurgenson, Billy Kilmer, Larry Brown and Chris Hanburger.
He wasn't God, but he was close.
But see, I had to believe what he told me; I had no reason to question him and no way to verify what he said.
But today, the path between fan and team isn't just a single, unpaved road traveled only by a single, anointed reporter. Now we have the information superhighway with it's ten-lane blacktops and maglev mass transit system.
Now, we put into use my all-time favorite quote from former President Ronald Reagan.
"Trust, but verify"
And so I trust men like Thomas Boswell, but I also verify. And, today at least, what he wrote wasn't pretty.
In the beginning of his article ("Route To the Bottom? It Starts at the Top"), Boswell makes the tired and unfair comparison between this year's Nationals and the 1962 New York Mets, the model of franchise futility.
But there is no honest comparison, save of course the number of Mets' losses that year (120) and the projected losses for the Nationals this year (117). The Mets were a rag-tag, moribund group of has-beens and never-will be's. Only one of them-17-year-old Ed Kranepool-is still remembered by Mets' fans today (though to be fair, pitcher Vinegar Bend Mizell went on to become a United States Congressman).
The Nationals' roster is full of players that other teams lust after. Jesus Flores, Nick Johnson, Ryan Zimmerman, Adam Dunn, Elijah Dukes and Jordan Zimmermann are just some of the team's young talent around which a winner can be built.
So why the comparison, Boz?
Referring to the team's "blueprint of broken promises," Boswell points to the Nationals' refusal to resign Alfonso Soriano following the 2006 season.
So Tom, you think the Nationals should have resigned him?
For his $18 million a year salary ($136 million total), Soriano has averaged .283-25-57 with a .334 on-base percentage for the Chicago Cubs.
Do you hink the Nationals would have paid that much to Soriano and still been willing to plunk $15-20 million down for Steven Strasburg this summer?
He also complained about Stan Kasten and "The Plan," saying that if Kasten was truly copying the Braves model that he created, the team would be signing many more free agents. He referenced the 1991 signings of Sid Bream, Rafael Belliard, Terry Pendleton and Otis Nixon as proof that the Braves would sign badly needed players, but the Nationals won't.
Oh, Boz ....
Kasten as repeatedly promised that when the Nationals were ready to contend, the Lerner family would happily pony up the resources to sign the "final pieces" for a contending Nationals' team.
Memo to Boz: the Nationals aren't ready to contend yet.
If you'll notice, Boswell didn't mention that in those developing years, from 1988-1990, Kasten didn't sign anyone. He waited until the team was ready to compete before signing those veteran players players.
If Boswell wants to see Stan Kasten do in Washington what he did in Atlanta, he need only open his eyes.
The Nationals, just like the Braves, have refrained from signing big name free agents because they aren't ready to win. Once the young pitching staff matures, I'm sure we'll see the Nationals make the same kind of moves that the Braves did two decades ago.
Look, I'm in no way suggesting that Tom Boswell and other writers shouldn't be subjective in their writing, but they sure should be honest. Sports fans today are far more knowledgable and have access to all of sports history at their finger tips. It's almost impossible to slip a curve ball by them anymore.
The Washington Nationals are facing so many real problems these days that they don't have time to defend themselves against this neverending silly symphony. And that's where the Bleacher Reporters come in.
We read. We research. We evaluate. We fact check.
And then we give you our view. Sure, it's subjective at times, and not always wholly accurate.
But it gives you, the reader, a second opinion.
I hope this isn't copyrighted but, we report, you decide.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
A few nights ago, I caught my 17-year-old son sneaking into my house at two in the morning. He was repeatedly warned about breaking curfew and this was the last straw. To teach him a lesson once and for all, I ran downstairs, threw open my 12-year-old daughter's bedroom door and woke her up out of a sound sleep. "You're grounded for a month!" I shouted.
Boy, I sure taught him a lesson.
What's that you say? It didn't make sense to punish the innocent while letting the guilty go free?
Well, change "son" to Manny Acta and "daughter" to Randy St. Claire and you get the gist of the latest drama eminating from Nats Town.
Manny Acta has lost control of his team. He sits in the dugout and remains stoic and silent, unmoved and unfazed while doubles turn into home runs and outs at home magically disappear into the realm of mulligans and do-overs. I would say that his team does a great impression of the Keystone Cops, but that would be doing a grave disservice to that comedy troop of the silent era.
Manny Acta is Nero watching Rome burn. He's Hitler planning a new offensive while Berlin is surrounded by the Russian and American armies. Acta is Richard Nixon, trying to convince the Washington press corps that he's not a crook.
But unlike those other guys who eventually saw the writing on the wall, Manny Acta continues to dismiss the obvious and refuses to try something new, something different.
And the Nationals, for a reason that both escapes me and defies logic, fired the one coach on the staff that is generally well regarded throughout the baseball world.
Don't believe me?
Remember all those bruised and beaten pitchers that Jim Bowden brought in every spring? From Esteban Loiaza to Daniel Cabrera-and including a cast of thousands in between-former general manager Jim Bowden would announce the signing of a pitcher who was but a shell of his former self and say, "Randy St. Claire is one of the premier pitching coaches in all of baseball. We believe he can help (fill in name here) regain his ability.
And he often did just that.
And now, St. Claire is the reason the Nationals have embarrassed both themselves and their fans for the second year in a row?
No.
Part of the fault lies with the Lerner family, owners of the Nationals, for the way in which they built their franchise. And part of the fault lies with Stan Kasten, who needed to be more forceful with his vision as to how the team should have been put together. And part of the fault lies with Jim Bowden, though to be fair he was just playing the hand he was dealt.
And in other situations, Manny Acta might have-probably could have-succeeded as a thoroughly competent manager. It's just in this situation, he's dragging the team down with him.
But why would the front office fire Randy St. Claire? I mean, Mark Lerner must know that his team's starting staff is the youngest in the major leagues and has the fewest number of wins as well.
If the Lerners, or the team president, or its general manager believed that John Lannan, Jordan Zimmermann, Shairon Martis, Craig Stammen and Ross Detwiler should be pitching better then they are, then they have even less baseball acumen than we thought.
Again, why Randy St. Claire?
Because either the big-shots are fools, or they think we are.
They hope-maybe they believe-that by sacrificing St. Claire to the baseball gods, the rioting citizens of Nats Town would settle down and buy them more time to field a winner.
But they are oh so wrong.
Every last Nationals fan who still cares about the team-I think there are about 20,000 or so of us left-can see this act as a canard, a prevarication, a lie. The fans aren't stupid enough to think Randy St. Claire was the problem and see this move on the part of the Nationals like a Michael Jordan pump-fake.
The problem is, we're not biting.
If the Nationals don't do some serious introspection and then dance the mea culpa (and fire Manny Acta), they will have lost what little good will remains for baseball in Washington.
By firing St. Claire, they are telling us that they aren't going to fire Manny Acta this year. I mean, if things aren't bad enough to fire him now, what will it take to make that change?
It's a dark day for baseball in our nation's capital. If the Nationals can somehow extricate themselves from this very bad decision, the fans will kiss and make up.
But if they don't .....
Boy, I sure taught him a lesson.
What's that you say? It didn't make sense to punish the innocent while letting the guilty go free?
Well, change "son" to Manny Acta and "daughter" to Randy St. Claire and you get the gist of the latest drama eminating from Nats Town.
Manny Acta has lost control of his team. He sits in the dugout and remains stoic and silent, unmoved and unfazed while doubles turn into home runs and outs at home magically disappear into the realm of mulligans and do-overs. I would say that his team does a great impression of the Keystone Cops, but that would be doing a grave disservice to that comedy troop of the silent era.
Manny Acta is Nero watching Rome burn. He's Hitler planning a new offensive while Berlin is surrounded by the Russian and American armies. Acta is Richard Nixon, trying to convince the Washington press corps that he's not a crook.
But unlike those other guys who eventually saw the writing on the wall, Manny Acta continues to dismiss the obvious and refuses to try something new, something different.
And the Nationals, for a reason that both escapes me and defies logic, fired the one coach on the staff that is generally well regarded throughout the baseball world.
Don't believe me?
Remember all those bruised and beaten pitchers that Jim Bowden brought in every spring? From Esteban Loiaza to Daniel Cabrera-and including a cast of thousands in between-former general manager Jim Bowden would announce the signing of a pitcher who was but a shell of his former self and say, "Randy St. Claire is one of the premier pitching coaches in all of baseball. We believe he can help (fill in name here) regain his ability.
And he often did just that.
And now, St. Claire is the reason the Nationals have embarrassed both themselves and their fans for the second year in a row?
No.
Part of the fault lies with the Lerner family, owners of the Nationals, for the way in which they built their franchise. And part of the fault lies with Stan Kasten, who needed to be more forceful with his vision as to how the team should have been put together. And part of the fault lies with Jim Bowden, though to be fair he was just playing the hand he was dealt.
And in other situations, Manny Acta might have-probably could have-succeeded as a thoroughly competent manager. It's just in this situation, he's dragging the team down with him.
But why would the front office fire Randy St. Claire? I mean, Mark Lerner must know that his team's starting staff is the youngest in the major leagues and has the fewest number of wins as well.
If the Lerners, or the team president, or its general manager believed that John Lannan, Jordan Zimmermann, Shairon Martis, Craig Stammen and Ross Detwiler should be pitching better then they are, then they have even less baseball acumen than we thought.
Again, why Randy St. Claire?
Because either the big-shots are fools, or they think we are.
They hope-maybe they believe-that by sacrificing St. Claire to the baseball gods, the rioting citizens of Nats Town would settle down and buy them more time to field a winner.
But they are oh so wrong.
Every last Nationals fan who still cares about the team-I think there are about 20,000 or so of us left-can see this act as a canard, a prevarication, a lie. The fans aren't stupid enough to think Randy St. Claire was the problem and see this move on the part of the Nationals like a Michael Jordan pump-fake.
The problem is, we're not biting.
If the Nationals don't do some serious introspection and then dance the mea culpa (and fire Manny Acta), they will have lost what little good will remains for baseball in Washington.
By firing St. Claire, they are telling us that they aren't going to fire Manny Acta this year. I mean, if things aren't bad enough to fire him now, what will it take to make that change?
It's a dark day for baseball in our nation's capital. If the Nationals can somehow extricate themselves from this very bad decision, the fans will kiss and make up.
But if they don't .....
Monday, June 1, 2009
Things are turning ugly in the Nats' Nation.
To be sure, the problems didn't just begin. The community was being held together with a combination of prayers and duct tape when the doors of Space Coast Stadium swung opened this past February. The demons from the previous year, injuries, under performance and a lack of talent, seemed to have been exorcised from the team's roster.
Adam Dunn's towering presence, Ryan Zimmerman's maturing demeanor and the youthful talent of Jordan Zimmermann and Jesus Flores seemed to salve the team's near-mortal wounds from 2008.
But general manager Jim Bowden was forced to resign just days after Spring Training began and it was all downhill from there.
With nearly a third of the season completed, the Nationals are 13-35, 23 games below .500. If they were to play .500 ball for the rest of the season (a near impossibility), they would still finish with one of the worst records in the league at 69-93.
The season is, in a word, hopeless.
But what about the future of the franchise?
The drive-by fans, those who only support a winning team, left long ago. Most of them have never seen the inside of Nationals Park. The serious fans, the students of the game, have seen their numbers slowly erode as crisis after crisis enveloped the team, smothering the present and imploding the future.
For the moment, all that remains to cheer on the Nationals are the die-hards, those of us who would attend a game during a nuclear raid because the fallout would add a nice purple haze to the evening sky.
But, based on home attendance and viewership of Nationals' games on MASN, there are only 20,000 or so of us left. That's not much of a base to count on.
And oh, how the fans of the Indians and the Red Sox and the Yankees scoff at baseball in Washington.
Scoff they might, but they couldn't be more wrong about the team, the city, and especially the fans.
While the city of Washington may have a baseball history that dates back to Teddy Roosevelt, Washingtonians certainly don't. Most of us old enough to remember Frank Howard and Del Unser and Dick Bosman are now in our fifties.
Native Washingtonians under 40 don't have a relationship with baseball and the transient nature of the city brings us baseball fans that have already pledged their allegiance to their hometown teams.
Washington is a cynical city; it's hard not to be when the politicians outnumber the common folk. Every statement by the team, every excuse and every justification is scrutinized as if it came from the president himself.
The "plan?" Yeah, right. It's code for "No way I'm going to blow my billions on a bunch of guys past their prime."
The Lerner family-owners of the Nationals-have more money than most of the big city, East coast teams but are considered frugal to a fault because "The Plan" doesn't call for the signing of expensive free agents.
Stan Kasten, the architect of the miracle in Atlanta, keeps talking about building for the future, but fewer people are listening these days. It's kind of hard, after all, to preach a "from the bottom up" building process when the team keeps getting worse every year.
Jim Bowden was universally hated, but his replacement, Mike Rizzo, isn't "officially" the team's general manager, so he can't be hated yet. And manager Manny Acta's days are numbered, in part because of his horrific record, but mostly because he has lost his team. They are rudderless and in need of some fiery rhetoric, something poor Manny just can't deliver.
Sound hopeless? Nope.
When healthy, the Nationals have solid major leaguers at all eight positions, and have a wealth of young starting pitching. The bullpen, which couldn't have been worse over the team's first 38 games has been yeoman, perhaps even above average, over the last week or so. The defense, which couldn't get to balls they should have and booted the ones they reached, is showing signs of improvement.
In other words, it took a perfect storm to capsize the 2009 season before it ever got started.
But it won't take much to right the S.S. Nationals. The fix is really very simple.
Rizzo and Acta, aren't playing to win. They are playing not to lose. Their jobs are on the line and so they are are trying to stop the leaking dike with their finger instead of rebuilding it entirely. So end the suspense; give Rizzo the GM's job officially and fire Manny Acta. Bring in a manager who will fight for his players and chew a few umpire's backsides for both cause and effect.
Make the tough trades sooner rather than later. It must be difficult for the clubhouse as they watch the clock tick down to the July 31st trade deadline, knowing full well that when the clock strikes midnight, Nick Johnson, Austin Kearns and several others will most likely be former Nationals.
The Nationals are a team waiting for the other shoe to drop. So drop it already. Lance the boil that is the 2009 season and let the healing begin. Trade some veterans, get some prospects and give Steven Strasburg the combination to the Lerner's vault and see what happens.
The Nationals aren't a 1988 Yugo in need of a major overhaul and a new paint job. They're more like a classic Camaro that isn't firing on all cylinders. Give it a tune-up, throw on some custom wheels, grease the differential and get out of the way.
The boys just need to find some cohesiveness.
That, and a center fielder.
To be sure, the problems didn't just begin. The community was being held together with a combination of prayers and duct tape when the doors of Space Coast Stadium swung opened this past February. The demons from the previous year, injuries, under performance and a lack of talent, seemed to have been exorcised from the team's roster.
Adam Dunn's towering presence, Ryan Zimmerman's maturing demeanor and the youthful talent of Jordan Zimmermann and Jesus Flores seemed to salve the team's near-mortal wounds from 2008.
But general manager Jim Bowden was forced to resign just days after Spring Training began and it was all downhill from there.
With nearly a third of the season completed, the Nationals are 13-35, 23 games below .500. If they were to play .500 ball for the rest of the season (a near impossibility), they would still finish with one of the worst records in the league at 69-93.
The season is, in a word, hopeless.
But what about the future of the franchise?
The drive-by fans, those who only support a winning team, left long ago. Most of them have never seen the inside of Nationals Park. The serious fans, the students of the game, have seen their numbers slowly erode as crisis after crisis enveloped the team, smothering the present and imploding the future.
For the moment, all that remains to cheer on the Nationals are the die-hards, those of us who would attend a game during a nuclear raid because the fallout would add a nice purple haze to the evening sky.
But, based on home attendance and viewership of Nationals' games on MASN, there are only 20,000 or so of us left. That's not much of a base to count on.
And oh, how the fans of the Indians and the Red Sox and the Yankees scoff at baseball in Washington.
Scoff they might, but they couldn't be more wrong about the team, the city, and especially the fans.
While the city of Washington may have a baseball history that dates back to Teddy Roosevelt, Washingtonians certainly don't. Most of us old enough to remember Frank Howard and Del Unser and Dick Bosman are now in our fifties.
Native Washingtonians under 40 don't have a relationship with baseball and the transient nature of the city brings us baseball fans that have already pledged their allegiance to their hometown teams.
Washington is a cynical city; it's hard not to be when the politicians outnumber the common folk. Every statement by the team, every excuse and every justification is scrutinized as if it came from the president himself.
The "plan?" Yeah, right. It's code for "No way I'm going to blow my billions on a bunch of guys past their prime."
The Lerner family-owners of the Nationals-have more money than most of the big city, East coast teams but are considered frugal to a fault because "The Plan" doesn't call for the signing of expensive free agents.
Stan Kasten, the architect of the miracle in Atlanta, keeps talking about building for the future, but fewer people are listening these days. It's kind of hard, after all, to preach a "from the bottom up" building process when the team keeps getting worse every year.
Jim Bowden was universally hated, but his replacement, Mike Rizzo, isn't "officially" the team's general manager, so he can't be hated yet. And manager Manny Acta's days are numbered, in part because of his horrific record, but mostly because he has lost his team. They are rudderless and in need of some fiery rhetoric, something poor Manny just can't deliver.
Sound hopeless? Nope.
When healthy, the Nationals have solid major leaguers at all eight positions, and have a wealth of young starting pitching. The bullpen, which couldn't have been worse over the team's first 38 games has been yeoman, perhaps even above average, over the last week or so. The defense, which couldn't get to balls they should have and booted the ones they reached, is showing signs of improvement.
In other words, it took a perfect storm to capsize the 2009 season before it ever got started.
But it won't take much to right the S.S. Nationals. The fix is really very simple.
Rizzo and Acta, aren't playing to win. They are playing not to lose. Their jobs are on the line and so they are are trying to stop the leaking dike with their finger instead of rebuilding it entirely. So end the suspense; give Rizzo the GM's job officially and fire Manny Acta. Bring in a manager who will fight for his players and chew a few umpire's backsides for both cause and effect.
Make the tough trades sooner rather than later. It must be difficult for the clubhouse as they watch the clock tick down to the July 31st trade deadline, knowing full well that when the clock strikes midnight, Nick Johnson, Austin Kearns and several others will most likely be former Nationals.
The Nationals are a team waiting for the other shoe to drop. So drop it already. Lance the boil that is the 2009 season and let the healing begin. Trade some veterans, get some prospects and give Steven Strasburg the combination to the Lerner's vault and see what happens.
The Nationals aren't a 1988 Yugo in need of a major overhaul and a new paint job. They're more like a classic Camaro that isn't firing on all cylinders. Give it a tune-up, throw on some custom wheels, grease the differential and get out of the way.
The boys just need to find some cohesiveness.
That, and a center fielder.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
With their 6-3 win over the San Francisco Giants on Wednesday afternoon, the Washington Nationals return home with a still league-worst record of 11-21. That said, they finished their west-coast road trip at 4-4, and really, it should have been 6-2.
But I don't have to tell you about the Nationals' bullpen, right?
A couple of interesting themes are beginning to emerge now that the season is about one-fifth over. The bullpen could be the worst of baseball's modern era, and the starting pitching, though it started badly, is looking pretty good.
And oh, can the Washington Nationals hit.
How would you like to face this lineup?
SS-Cristian Guzman: .390-1-9
1B-Nick Johnson: .333-3-19
3B-Ryan Zimmerman: .357-8-26
LF-Adam Dunn: .313-11-28
CF-Elijah Dukes: .280-4-23
RF-Kearns/Willingham .220-8-22
C - Jesus Flores: .311-4-15
2B-Alberto Gonzalez: .271-1-5
The Nationals are fourth in the National League in runs (5.4 per game), third in home runs (42), walks (138), batting average (.280), on-base percent (.361), second in slugging percent (.447) and first in OPS (.809) and total bases (512).
In 2008, the Nationals' offense was a polar opposite, finishing dead last in total bases, OPS, slugging percent and home runs. They finished 14th in batting average and 11th in walks.
So Nationals' fans can look forward to several more years of a top-of-the-line offense, right?
Wrong.
Nick Johnson and Austin Kearns won't return in 2010, and in all probability, won't be in Washington after the July 31st trade deadline. Cristian Guzman and Adam Dunn are only signed through next year, and it's doubtful that either will resign with the Nationals as long as the team continues to lose this badly. Josh Willingham will be eligible for free agency after the 2011 season.
That leaves Ryan Zimmerman, Jesus Flores, Alberto Gonzalez and Elijah Dukes as the only starters who can be counted on long-term.
Sure, the Nationals might sign some of these players to multi-year deals in the next couple of years, but if attendance remains bad-the Nationals are currently 29th out of 30 teams-they might not have the money to lure their stars back even if they want to.
Sure, there are a few good prospects in the minor leagues, but most of them are pitchers. Justin Maxwell at 'AAA' Columbus, Chris Marrero and Michael Burgess at "A+" Potomac, and Derek Norris at "A-" Hagerstown are promising, but only one-Maxwell-is close to being major league ready.
My concern is that just as this potent offense deconstructs, that lousy pitching staff is going to become very, very good.
John Lannan (2-3, 3.89) is 24 and Shairon Martis (5-0, 3.98) is just 22, and both have shown that they will be quality starters for years to come. Jordan Zimmermann (2-1, 5.28) is 22 and has had three quality starts in his five major league games. He has struck out 26 and walked just 8 in 29 innings. Scott Olsen hasn't pitched well this year but is just 25 and has already started 100 games in the major leagues.
The Nationals also have several pitchers in their minor league system that look very good. Craig Stammen at Columbus (4-1, 1.85) and Ross Detwiler at Harrisburg (0-3, 2.96) look promising, and there are several others (Colten Willems, Josh Smoker, Cole Kimball) who are impressing as well.
Add Steven Strasburg, the presumptive number-one pick in the June amateur draft (11-0, 1.28, 17 strikeouts per 9 innings for San Diego State), and the Washington Nationals will soon have one of the strongest starting rotations in the National League.
The problem is that the starting pitching will get good about the same time that the offense returns to earth.
So instead of losing games 9-8, they'll lose them 3-2.
Unless of course, the Lerner family-owners of the Washington Nationals-take a deep breath, cross their fingers, and resign their core players next year.
If they do that, and if the rotation matures as expected, the Nationals will be a 90-win team by 2011. And if they can do something about that atrocious bullpen, they could reach .... dare I say it .... the World Series.
Of course, they need to get to .500 first, and that isn't happening anytime soon.
But I don't have to tell you about the Nationals' bullpen, right?
A couple of interesting themes are beginning to emerge now that the season is about one-fifth over. The bullpen could be the worst of baseball's modern era, and the starting pitching, though it started badly, is looking pretty good.
And oh, can the Washington Nationals hit.
How would you like to face this lineup?
SS-Cristian Guzman: .390-1-9
1B-Nick Johnson: .333-3-19
3B-Ryan Zimmerman: .357-8-26
LF-Adam Dunn: .313-11-28
CF-Elijah Dukes: .280-4-23
RF-Kearns/Willingham .220-8-22
C - Jesus Flores: .311-4-15
2B-Alberto Gonzalez: .271-1-5
The Nationals are fourth in the National League in runs (5.4 per game), third in home runs (42), walks (138), batting average (.280), on-base percent (.361), second in slugging percent (.447) and first in OPS (.809) and total bases (512).
In 2008, the Nationals' offense was a polar opposite, finishing dead last in total bases, OPS, slugging percent and home runs. They finished 14th in batting average and 11th in walks.
So Nationals' fans can look forward to several more years of a top-of-the-line offense, right?
Wrong.
Nick Johnson and Austin Kearns won't return in 2010, and in all probability, won't be in Washington after the July 31st trade deadline. Cristian Guzman and Adam Dunn are only signed through next year, and it's doubtful that either will resign with the Nationals as long as the team continues to lose this badly. Josh Willingham will be eligible for free agency after the 2011 season.
That leaves Ryan Zimmerman, Jesus Flores, Alberto Gonzalez and Elijah Dukes as the only starters who can be counted on long-term.
Sure, the Nationals might sign some of these players to multi-year deals in the next couple of years, but if attendance remains bad-the Nationals are currently 29th out of 30 teams-they might not have the money to lure their stars back even if they want to.
Sure, there are a few good prospects in the minor leagues, but most of them are pitchers. Justin Maxwell at 'AAA' Columbus, Chris Marrero and Michael Burgess at "A+" Potomac, and Derek Norris at "A-" Hagerstown are promising, but only one-Maxwell-is close to being major league ready.
My concern is that just as this potent offense deconstructs, that lousy pitching staff is going to become very, very good.
John Lannan (2-3, 3.89) is 24 and Shairon Martis (5-0, 3.98) is just 22, and both have shown that they will be quality starters for years to come. Jordan Zimmermann (2-1, 5.28) is 22 and has had three quality starts in his five major league games. He has struck out 26 and walked just 8 in 29 innings. Scott Olsen hasn't pitched well this year but is just 25 and has already started 100 games in the major leagues.
The Nationals also have several pitchers in their minor league system that look very good. Craig Stammen at Columbus (4-1, 1.85) and Ross Detwiler at Harrisburg (0-3, 2.96) look promising, and there are several others (Colten Willems, Josh Smoker, Cole Kimball) who are impressing as well.
Add Steven Strasburg, the presumptive number-one pick in the June amateur draft (11-0, 1.28, 17 strikeouts per 9 innings for San Diego State), and the Washington Nationals will soon have one of the strongest starting rotations in the National League.
The problem is that the starting pitching will get good about the same time that the offense returns to earth.
So instead of losing games 9-8, they'll lose them 3-2.
Unless of course, the Lerner family-owners of the Washington Nationals-take a deep breath, cross their fingers, and resign their core players next year.
If they do that, and if the rotation matures as expected, the Nationals will be a 90-win team by 2011. And if they can do something about that atrocious bullpen, they could reach .... dare I say it .... the World Series.
Of course, they need to get to .500 first, and that isn't happening anytime soon.
Friday, May 8, 2009
Two things stood out in the Nationals' come from behind 11-9 victory over the Los Angeles Dodgers Wednesday night, and both of them were positive.
First, the Nationals plated 11 runs and meted out 18 hits against the first-place Dodgers. They now have a .275 team batting average (4th in the league), a .363 on-base percentage (2nd) and have drawn 125 walks (2nd). They are on pace to score in excess of 150 more runs in 2009 than last year.
Based on current stats, here are the projections for the Nationals' starting lineup over a full season:
1B-Nick Johnson: .330-12-66, .414 OBP, .430 SLG
2B-Anderson Hernandez: .328-0-48, .430 OBP, .403 SLG
SS-Cristian Guzman: .392-6-42, .392 OBP, .500 SLG
3B-Ryan Zimmerman: .336-30-120, .391 OBP, .560 SLG
LF-Adam Dunn: .290-42-138, .445 OBP, .559 SLG
CF-Elijah Dukes: .290-24-224, .370 OBP, .506 SLG
RF-Austin Kearns: .258-18-90, .410 OBP, .515 SLG
C - Jesus Flores: .301-18-78, .372 OBP, .494 SLG
Last year, the Nationals were dead-last in the National League with a .363 on-base percentage. This year, Dukes has the worst on-base percentage at .370 and their average OBP is a robust .403.
And with the exception of Adam Dunn, this is the same starting lineup that was the worst National League offense in 2008.
What's the difference? For the most part, the Nationals have remained healthy in 2009 after leading the major leagues in lost player days to injury last year. That, and the team also had the youngest starting lineup in the National League in 2008. Players like Anderson Hernandez, Jesus Flores, Ryan Zimmerman and Elijah Dukes are a year older and a year better.
The second bright spot coming out of Los Angeles was pitcher Jordan Zimmermann. Now, you'd think that a pitcher who gave up six runs in six innings while walking three and seeing his ERA jump from 4.24 to 5.48 would be hiding in the showers, unwilling to give an interview or read the morning papers.
But really, Zimmermann pitched two games against Los Angeles. In the first game, he gave up six runs while allowing four hits and two walks. In the second game, over five innings, the 22-year-old gave up just two hits and a walk.
Nationals' manager Manny Acta had nothing but superlatives to say about his young pitcher.
Confusing?
In the first inning, Zimmermann was overthrowing which made his change-up break so much that he couldn't locate it for strikes. He was forced to go with his fastball as his primary pitch.
In that first inning, Zimmermann struck out Rafael Furcal, walked Orlando Hudson on a 3-2 pitch, and then gave up a broken-bat flare to Andre Eithier that fell in a four-foot Bermuda Triangle in between Adam Dunn, Elijah Dukes and Cristian Guzman. James Loney hit a solid single into center, and Russell Martin walked before Kemp slugged his grand slam.
The sixth run of the inning should have been unearned. Casey Blake hit a medium-deep fly ball to right center, but Elijah Dukes and Adam Dunn both pulled away at the last minute, allowing Blake to make it to third on what was ruled a triple but really was an error. Blake scored on a sacrifice fly.
And that was it.
Over the next five innings, Zimmermann was in total control, allowing just two hits and a walk, throwing 67% of his pitches for strikes.
Zimmermann showed the Nationals a great deal on Wednesday. For most young pitchers-heck, for most pitchers period-a 6-run first inning would have so unnerved them that they would have to be removed from the game quickly. But Zimmermann showed the Nats his bull dog tenacity, settling down and allowing the team the opportunity to at first get back in the game, and later to win it.
It doesn't much matter what Zimmermann's stats look like come September. He's already shown that he can dominate major league hitters, that he can win when he doesn't have his good stuff, and that he will keep battling regardless of score or situation.
Manager Manny Acta said last night that the Nationals are a couple of bullpen arms and a number-one starter away from contending for the playoffs.
I believe him.
Four of the team's five starters-John Lannan, Scott Olsen, Shairon Martis and Zimmermann-give the team the opportunity to win every night. If the Nationals trade one or two of their excess outfielders for veteran bullpen help, and if Steven Strasburg signs quickly and pitches up to his talent, the Nationals could (could) have a solid second half and reach the end of the season primed to contend in 2010.
Sure, all the planets have to align "just so" for it to happen, but the Nationals are that close to turning the corner.
Really.
First, the Nationals plated 11 runs and meted out 18 hits against the first-place Dodgers. They now have a .275 team batting average (4th in the league), a .363 on-base percentage (2nd) and have drawn 125 walks (2nd). They are on pace to score in excess of 150 more runs in 2009 than last year.
Based on current stats, here are the projections for the Nationals' starting lineup over a full season:
1B-Nick Johnson: .330-12-66, .414 OBP, .430 SLG
2B-Anderson Hernandez: .328-0-48, .430 OBP, .403 SLG
SS-Cristian Guzman: .392-6-42, .392 OBP, .500 SLG
3B-Ryan Zimmerman: .336-30-120, .391 OBP, .560 SLG
LF-Adam Dunn: .290-42-138, .445 OBP, .559 SLG
CF-Elijah Dukes: .290-24-224, .370 OBP, .506 SLG
RF-Austin Kearns: .258-18-90, .410 OBP, .515 SLG
C - Jesus Flores: .301-18-78, .372 OBP, .494 SLG
Last year, the Nationals were dead-last in the National League with a .363 on-base percentage. This year, Dukes has the worst on-base percentage at .370 and their average OBP is a robust .403.
And with the exception of Adam Dunn, this is the same starting lineup that was the worst National League offense in 2008.
What's the difference? For the most part, the Nationals have remained healthy in 2009 after leading the major leagues in lost player days to injury last year. That, and the team also had the youngest starting lineup in the National League in 2008. Players like Anderson Hernandez, Jesus Flores, Ryan Zimmerman and Elijah Dukes are a year older and a year better.
The second bright spot coming out of Los Angeles was pitcher Jordan Zimmermann. Now, you'd think that a pitcher who gave up six runs in six innings while walking three and seeing his ERA jump from 4.24 to 5.48 would be hiding in the showers, unwilling to give an interview or read the morning papers.
But really, Zimmermann pitched two games against Los Angeles. In the first game, he gave up six runs while allowing four hits and two walks. In the second game, over five innings, the 22-year-old gave up just two hits and a walk.
Nationals' manager Manny Acta had nothing but superlatives to say about his young pitcher.
Confusing?
In the first inning, Zimmermann was overthrowing which made his change-up break so much that he couldn't locate it for strikes. He was forced to go with his fastball as his primary pitch.
In that first inning, Zimmermann struck out Rafael Furcal, walked Orlando Hudson on a 3-2 pitch, and then gave up a broken-bat flare to Andre Eithier that fell in a four-foot Bermuda Triangle in between Adam Dunn, Elijah Dukes and Cristian Guzman. James Loney hit a solid single into center, and Russell Martin walked before Kemp slugged his grand slam.
The sixth run of the inning should have been unearned. Casey Blake hit a medium-deep fly ball to right center, but Elijah Dukes and Adam Dunn both pulled away at the last minute, allowing Blake to make it to third on what was ruled a triple but really was an error. Blake scored on a sacrifice fly.
And that was it.
Over the next five innings, Zimmermann was in total control, allowing just two hits and a walk, throwing 67% of his pitches for strikes.
Zimmermann showed the Nationals a great deal on Wednesday. For most young pitchers-heck, for most pitchers period-a 6-run first inning would have so unnerved them that they would have to be removed from the game quickly. But Zimmermann showed the Nats his bull dog tenacity, settling down and allowing the team the opportunity to at first get back in the game, and later to win it.
It doesn't much matter what Zimmermann's stats look like come September. He's already shown that he can dominate major league hitters, that he can win when he doesn't have his good stuff, and that he will keep battling regardless of score or situation.
Manager Manny Acta said last night that the Nationals are a couple of bullpen arms and a number-one starter away from contending for the playoffs.
I believe him.
Four of the team's five starters-John Lannan, Scott Olsen, Shairon Martis and Zimmermann-give the team the opportunity to win every night. If the Nationals trade one or two of their excess outfielders for veteran bullpen help, and if Steven Strasburg signs quickly and pitches up to his talent, the Nationals could (could) have a solid second half and reach the end of the season primed to contend in 2010.
Sure, all the planets have to align "just so" for it to happen, but the Nationals are that close to turning the corner.
Really.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Last season, the Washington Nationals lost 102 games and their accompanying statistics bore that out. In 2008, they were 13th in runs per game, 15th in home runs and dead last in slugging percentage.
This year, the Washington Nationals seem to be on their way to losing 108 games, but this time, their statistics seem to make their bad start an aberration. After 20 games, the team is score a league-average 4.5 runs per game, is sixth in the league with 22 home runs and a .270 team batting average and are tied for second with 87 walks.
This is how the starting eight's statistics project for a full season (give or take, of course, because of the relatively small sample):
1B- Nick Johnson: .333-16-50
2B-Anderson Hernandez: .304-0-32
SS-Cristian Guzman: .474-0-32
3B-Ryan Zimmerman: .291-32-112
LF-Adam Dunn: .324-48-120
CF-Elijah Dukes: .292-24-104
RF-Austin Kearns: .240-24-88
C - Jesus Flores: .267-16-80
Other than the batting averages of Nick Johnson (.280 is more likely), Anderson Hernandez (he doesn't have a large enough major league sample to suggest he is that good a hitter), Cristian Guzman (he has only played in eight games) and Adam Dunn (he's a .250 hitter) every other projection looks spot-on.
This is why I have such high hopes for the Nationals this year. In 2008, the team didn't hit for average, didn't hit for power, and didn't walk enough. They led the league in grounding into double plays.
In other words, they earned their 59-102 record.
If projections hold, the 2009 Nationals are on pace to bat .270 with 178 home runs and score 750 runs. Using 2008 for comparison purposes, this team would have finished 3rd in the National League in batting average, 6th in home runs and 7th in runs scored.
Those numbers are most similar to the New York Mets (89 wins), the Houston Astros (86 wins) and the Milwaukee Brewers (90 wins.)
There is little doubt, then that the Nationals' offense is well above average, at least to this point in the season. Whether or not the team gets hot and can close in on a .500 record by season's end depends on the pitching staff.
Though the bullpen has been atrocious thus far, it has the talent already on the roster to be much better. The Nationals left some of their better relief pitchers off of the Opening Day roster because they had options remaining, keeping instead players who didn't have particularly good springs. A prime example was Jason Bergman, who did not allow a run in 11 innings but was optioned to Syracuse nonetheless.
The Nationals now have at least five relievers who are pitching well: Julian Taverez (3.12 ERA), Mike Hinckley (1.93), Joe Beimel (1.23), Jason Bergman (3.60) and Kip Wells (2.08). Yes, Bergman was sent down again, but he'll be back up soon. And Joe Beimel, without question the best reliever on the staff, is due to return from a non-throwing injury May 6th.
The remaining question mark is the starting rotation. All five starters-John Lannan, Scott Olsen, Daniel Cabrera, Jordan Zimmermann and Shairon Martis-have pitched well recently after getting pummeled early in the season, and things should get even better with the arrival of future number-one draft pick Steven Strasburg of San Diego State.
The current rotation will be okay this year, looking great one day and bad the next. But in the end, they will be a plus for the team overall.
Will the Nationals make it back to .500 in 2009? It's doubtful to be sure. But it's also doubtful-near impossible I'd venture-that the team loses 100+ games for the second season in a row.
The bullpen (hopefully) is fixed, and the starting pitching has vastly improved in the last two weeks, with the rotation throwing six quality starts (six innings pitched, three runs or less given up) in their last nine games.
If nothing untoward happens between now and the end of the season, the Nationals could very well win 73-75 games and be in a good position to contend in 2010, assuming they can sign one or two more quality free agents.
Sometimes, being 5-15 just isn't that bad.
This year, the Washington Nationals seem to be on their way to losing 108 games, but this time, their statistics seem to make their bad start an aberration. After 20 games, the team is score a league-average 4.5 runs per game, is sixth in the league with 22 home runs and a .270 team batting average and are tied for second with 87 walks.
This is how the starting eight's statistics project for a full season (give or take, of course, because of the relatively small sample):
1B- Nick Johnson: .333-16-50
2B-Anderson Hernandez: .304-0-32
SS-Cristian Guzman: .474-0-32
3B-Ryan Zimmerman: .291-32-112
LF-Adam Dunn: .324-48-120
CF-Elijah Dukes: .292-24-104
RF-Austin Kearns: .240-24-88
C - Jesus Flores: .267-16-80
Other than the batting averages of Nick Johnson (.280 is more likely), Anderson Hernandez (he doesn't have a large enough major league sample to suggest he is that good a hitter), Cristian Guzman (he has only played in eight games) and Adam Dunn (he's a .250 hitter) every other projection looks spot-on.
This is why I have such high hopes for the Nationals this year. In 2008, the team didn't hit for average, didn't hit for power, and didn't walk enough. They led the league in grounding into double plays.
In other words, they earned their 59-102 record.
If projections hold, the 2009 Nationals are on pace to bat .270 with 178 home runs and score 750 runs. Using 2008 for comparison purposes, this team would have finished 3rd in the National League in batting average, 6th in home runs and 7th in runs scored.
Those numbers are most similar to the New York Mets (89 wins), the Houston Astros (86 wins) and the Milwaukee Brewers (90 wins.)
There is little doubt, then that the Nationals' offense is well above average, at least to this point in the season. Whether or not the team gets hot and can close in on a .500 record by season's end depends on the pitching staff.
Though the bullpen has been atrocious thus far, it has the talent already on the roster to be much better. The Nationals left some of their better relief pitchers off of the Opening Day roster because they had options remaining, keeping instead players who didn't have particularly good springs. A prime example was Jason Bergman, who did not allow a run in 11 innings but was optioned to Syracuse nonetheless.
The Nationals now have at least five relievers who are pitching well: Julian Taverez (3.12 ERA), Mike Hinckley (1.93), Joe Beimel (1.23), Jason Bergman (3.60) and Kip Wells (2.08). Yes, Bergman was sent down again, but he'll be back up soon. And Joe Beimel, without question the best reliever on the staff, is due to return from a non-throwing injury May 6th.
The remaining question mark is the starting rotation. All five starters-John Lannan, Scott Olsen, Daniel Cabrera, Jordan Zimmermann and Shairon Martis-have pitched well recently after getting pummeled early in the season, and things should get even better with the arrival of future number-one draft pick Steven Strasburg of San Diego State.
The current rotation will be okay this year, looking great one day and bad the next. But in the end, they will be a plus for the team overall.
Will the Nationals make it back to .500 in 2009? It's doubtful to be sure. But it's also doubtful-near impossible I'd venture-that the team loses 100+ games for the second season in a row.
The bullpen (hopefully) is fixed, and the starting pitching has vastly improved in the last two weeks, with the rotation throwing six quality starts (six innings pitched, three runs or less given up) in their last nine games.
If nothing untoward happens between now and the end of the season, the Nationals could very well win 73-75 games and be in a good position to contend in 2010, assuming they can sign one or two more quality free agents.
Sometimes, being 5-15 just isn't that bad.
Monday, April 27, 2009
The law of unintended consequences is a powerful thing. In the mid 1970's, the national speed limit was lowered from 70 to 55 to help stem a rising death rate on the nation's interstate highway system. Incredibly, the number of deaths increased over the next decade as drivers felt more safe and stopped wearing their seat belts.
In 2001, America attacked Afghanistan to end the terrorist threat against the United States by the Taliban. Today, a resurgent Taliban is marching into Pakistan and may be after that nation's nuclear arsenal.
And last year, the Nationals drew a line in the sand in their negotiations with their top draft pick Aaron Crow, and when the clock struck midnight, the Nationals failed to sign him over a couple of hundred thousand dollars.
No team has failed to sign their top draft pick two years in a row, which means the Nationals have to, they just have to, sign that number-one pick this June. The problem is, that pick also happens to be the top pick in the entire draft, which means that the Nationals are going to pick, and have to sign, Steven Strasburg, perhaps the best college pitcher of the modern era.
The Nationals face a daunting task-financial, emotional and historical-in trying to sign Strasburg. His agent is none other than Scott Boras, the man who will lie, cheat, steal, do whatever it takes to get his client a contract far above his value.
In other words, if the Nationals want to sign Strasburg, they are going to have to pay higher than his market value.
Much higher.
Is it worth it? Rather, is he worth it?
Well, yes, and no.
While some have suggested that it will take more than $50 million dollars to get a deal done, most feel that a major league contract over six years totalling $15-20 million should be about right.
Here then, are the top five reasons why the Nationals have to sign Steven Strasburg this summer, regardless of the cost:
1) The Nationals are desperately in need of some positive press. Though the team's 4-14 start this year isn't indicative of their talented roster, baseball writers across the country are making the team this year's big joke, and I'm talking Henny Youngman "Take my wife, please!"big joke.
The Lerner family, owners of the team, are considered cheap and unwilling to field a winning team. If they don't sign Strasburg, they (and the Nationals) will be written off as major league team with minor league players and Little League hopes.
2) Steven Strasburg is a great player. It's hard to imagine that the svelte, tall, muscular right-hander was a pudgy 92 mph high school pitcher, unrecruited in his Senior season. At San Diego State, however, he lost 30 pounds, was embarrassed by his lack of conditioning, asked to quit the team by the strength coach, and emerged from all of that with a 100 mph fastball and a curve ball that bends like Beckham.
He was a closer his first season with the Aztecs and has started the last two years. He was great as a closer. He's been unhittable as a starter.
In the last two seasons, Strasburg has a record of 17-3 (including 9-0 this year) with a 1.53 ERA. In 167 innings, he has allowed just 106 hits and 29 walks while striking out 268.
No, that's not a typo. Two-hundred-sixty-eight. That works out to roughly 16 strikeouts and under two walks per game.
Most scouts believe he'll be in the Nationals' rotation by August, and will be the number-one starter the day he first dons his "Curly W" cap.
Yeah, he's that good.
3) With Strasburg in the rotation, the Nationals might well contend in 2010. Jordan Zimmermann, a 22-year-old rookie from Wisconsin-Stevens Point, has won his first two games since arriving in Washington, and every scout who has seen him says he is a number-one starter. He leads all Nationals' starters with a 2.38 ERA. Add John Lannan (the team's best starter last year), Scott Olsen (600 Major League innings at age 25) and promising rookie Shairon Martis and the Nationals are capable of winning every day they play.
4) Baseball in Washington is at a precipice. In 1961, the Senators moved to Minnesota and became the Twins, while their replacement moved to Texas ten years later. Though the team's attendance in their first year in Washington was great, it has been declining since. The Nationals averaged more than 4,000 fewer fans per game in their first year at their new park in 2008 then in their first year in aging RFK in 2005. Their 29,0005 per game last year was 13th in the National League and they are averaging 20,000 in 2009.
Baseball in Washington will succeed but, as in other cities dominated by an NFL team, they have to win to draw big. The signing of Strasburg will create a buzz inside the Beltway and Strasburg could add as many as 15-20 wins to the team's yearly total for the next decade.
5) Major League players need to know that the Nationals are players for their services. Until Adam Dunn signed in February, the team had been rejected more often than a computer geek at prom time. Getting Dunn said something, as did the signing of reliever Joe Beimel a month later. Blow a billion or so on a kid from San Diego State and I can guarantee you-yes, guarantee-that the Nationals will sign one more impact player this winter and be ready to contend in 2010.
That's how it works; no one wants to be the first one on the dance floor and no baseball player wants to be the first to sign with a really bad team. They want a reason to sign.
Steven Strasburg would give them that reason, cover if you will.
As I write this, the Nationals hit five home runs in Philadelphia, had two different four-run leads, yet lost the game on grand slams by Ryan Howard and Raul Ibanez. But that's okay. Things are really looking up. The Nationals lineup, with Nick Johnson, Ryan Zimmerman, Adam Dunn, Elijah Dukes and Austin Kearns/Josh Willingham in the middle, is formidable. Their starting rotation, with Jordan Zimmermann, John Lannan and Scott Oslen, is impressive.
But there are places, like the back end of the rotation and the entire bullpen, that need to be improved. One trade, one free agent signing, and Steven Strasburg in the rotation, and the Nationals will shed that laughing stock persona once and for all.
Really.
Granted, that's a lot of money to spend on a 20-year-old, but you have to remember, this is Washington we're talking about. If Barak Obama can spend $500 billion a month, the Lerner's can certainly come up with a paltry $15-20 million for a kid who can throw the ball 101 miles-per-hour.
In 2001, America attacked Afghanistan to end the terrorist threat against the United States by the Taliban. Today, a resurgent Taliban is marching into Pakistan and may be after that nation's nuclear arsenal.
And last year, the Nationals drew a line in the sand in their negotiations with their top draft pick Aaron Crow, and when the clock struck midnight, the Nationals failed to sign him over a couple of hundred thousand dollars.
No team has failed to sign their top draft pick two years in a row, which means the Nationals have to, they just have to, sign that number-one pick this June. The problem is, that pick also happens to be the top pick in the entire draft, which means that the Nationals are going to pick, and have to sign, Steven Strasburg, perhaps the best college pitcher of the modern era.
The Nationals face a daunting task-financial, emotional and historical-in trying to sign Strasburg. His agent is none other than Scott Boras, the man who will lie, cheat, steal, do whatever it takes to get his client a contract far above his value.
In other words, if the Nationals want to sign Strasburg, they are going to have to pay higher than his market value.
Much higher.
Is it worth it? Rather, is he worth it?
Well, yes, and no.
While some have suggested that it will take more than $50 million dollars to get a deal done, most feel that a major league contract over six years totalling $15-20 million should be about right.
Here then, are the top five reasons why the Nationals have to sign Steven Strasburg this summer, regardless of the cost:
1) The Nationals are desperately in need of some positive press. Though the team's 4-14 start this year isn't indicative of their talented roster, baseball writers across the country are making the team this year's big joke, and I'm talking Henny Youngman "Take my wife, please!"big joke.
The Lerner family, owners of the team, are considered cheap and unwilling to field a winning team. If they don't sign Strasburg, they (and the Nationals) will be written off as major league team with minor league players and Little League hopes.
2) Steven Strasburg is a great player. It's hard to imagine that the svelte, tall, muscular right-hander was a pudgy 92 mph high school pitcher, unrecruited in his Senior season. At San Diego State, however, he lost 30 pounds, was embarrassed by his lack of conditioning, asked to quit the team by the strength coach, and emerged from all of that with a 100 mph fastball and a curve ball that bends like Beckham.
He was a closer his first season with the Aztecs and has started the last two years. He was great as a closer. He's been unhittable as a starter.
In the last two seasons, Strasburg has a record of 17-3 (including 9-0 this year) with a 1.53 ERA. In 167 innings, he has allowed just 106 hits and 29 walks while striking out 268.
No, that's not a typo. Two-hundred-sixty-eight. That works out to roughly 16 strikeouts and under two walks per game.
Most scouts believe he'll be in the Nationals' rotation by August, and will be the number-one starter the day he first dons his "Curly W" cap.
Yeah, he's that good.
3) With Strasburg in the rotation, the Nationals might well contend in 2010. Jordan Zimmermann, a 22-year-old rookie from Wisconsin-Stevens Point, has won his first two games since arriving in Washington, and every scout who has seen him says he is a number-one starter. He leads all Nationals' starters with a 2.38 ERA. Add John Lannan (the team's best starter last year), Scott Olsen (600 Major League innings at age 25) and promising rookie Shairon Martis and the Nationals are capable of winning every day they play.
4) Baseball in Washington is at a precipice. In 1961, the Senators moved to Minnesota and became the Twins, while their replacement moved to Texas ten years later. Though the team's attendance in their first year in Washington was great, it has been declining since. The Nationals averaged more than 4,000 fewer fans per game in their first year at their new park in 2008 then in their first year in aging RFK in 2005. Their 29,0005 per game last year was 13th in the National League and they are averaging 20,000 in 2009.
Baseball in Washington will succeed but, as in other cities dominated by an NFL team, they have to win to draw big. The signing of Strasburg will create a buzz inside the Beltway and Strasburg could add as many as 15-20 wins to the team's yearly total for the next decade.
5) Major League players need to know that the Nationals are players for their services. Until Adam Dunn signed in February, the team had been rejected more often than a computer geek at prom time. Getting Dunn said something, as did the signing of reliever Joe Beimel a month later. Blow a billion or so on a kid from San Diego State and I can guarantee you-yes, guarantee-that the Nationals will sign one more impact player this winter and be ready to contend in 2010.
That's how it works; no one wants to be the first one on the dance floor and no baseball player wants to be the first to sign with a really bad team. They want a reason to sign.
Steven Strasburg would give them that reason, cover if you will.
As I write this, the Nationals hit five home runs in Philadelphia, had two different four-run leads, yet lost the game on grand slams by Ryan Howard and Raul Ibanez. But that's okay. Things are really looking up. The Nationals lineup, with Nick Johnson, Ryan Zimmerman, Adam Dunn, Elijah Dukes and Austin Kearns/Josh Willingham in the middle, is formidable. Their starting rotation, with Jordan Zimmermann, John Lannan and Scott Oslen, is impressive.
But there are places, like the back end of the rotation and the entire bullpen, that need to be improved. One trade, one free agent signing, and Steven Strasburg in the rotation, and the Nationals will shed that laughing stock persona once and for all.
Really.
Granted, that's a lot of money to spend on a 20-year-old, but you have to remember, this is Washington we're talking about. If Barak Obama can spend $500 billion a month, the Lerner's can certainly come up with a paltry $15-20 million for a kid who can throw the ball 101 miles-per-hour.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
For the Washington Nationals, first base is a two-part question. First, what in the world are they going to do next year, and second, what in the world is going on this year?
Nick Johnson was the team's starting first baseman long before the Expos moved to Washington in 2004. But since first donning the "Curly W," he has been available for just 48% of his team's games, missing all of 2007 and 120 games last year. His four year contract is up this year, and his age (31) and frequent injuries make it a near-certainty that he won't be resigned this off-season. Because he won't bring a compensation pick as a free agent, he'll likely be traded before the July 31st trade deadline.
The Nationals have two players in their Minor League pipeline who could eventually take over first base, but neither of them are close to being ready. Twenty-three year old Bill Rhinehart, an 11th round pick in 2007, has looked good thus far, batting .278-23-132 in 719 at-bats. However, he's started slowly for Harrisburg, batting just .139 in limited play.
Chris Marrero is the heir apparent, but after one good season two years ago, he fractured his ankle early in 2008 and missed the second half of the season. He returned this spring in the best shape of his career, and he's hitting well for Potomac, but he's only 19 and it will be at least two more years, maybe three, before he's ready to take on major league pitching.
Adam Dunn can play first-that was my choice heading into Opening Day-but his defensive liabilities were exposed during the World Baseball Classic in March.
No, he needs to stay in the outfield.
The other surprise is not that he's still healthy (that's not a surprise, it's a miracle) but rather the way Nick Johnson is playing. As the cleanup hitter in 2005 and 2006, Johnson swung for power, hitting 23 homers in 2006. But this year, things are different.
Johnson has been placed in the number-two hole in the lineup and has been asked to get on base for Ryan Zimmerman, Adam Dunn and Elijah Dukes. The change in his numbers are staggering.
He has 19 hits in 50 at-bats this year (.380) but just two of those hits are for extra bases, both doubles. In a full season (500 at-bats), Johnson would have 180 hits, 20 doubles and no home runs. Compare that to 2006 (46 doubles, 23 homers) and it's obvious that Johnson has changed his hitting style for the good of the team.
Instead of pulling the ball down the first base line, and hitting line drives into the right field gap, Johnson is poking soft line drives over the shortstop's head. He's also walking less, though his on-base percent of .446 is still amazing. Johnson has walked in 18% of his at-bats during his career, but just 10% in 2009.
That's what makes Johnson such a great talent. He is able to do what the team needs. He can hit for power, he can take a walk, and he can be a singles hitter.
And while his defense is not Gold Glove quality, it's very, very close.
It's sad that the Nationals are going to have to give up on him, but past history demands it. That said, Mike Rizzo gave up on Shawn Hill earlier this spring, and he's currently playing very well for the San Diego Padres. In two starts and ten innings, Hill is 1-0 for San Diego with a 3.60 ERA, striking out six while walking just two.
So you never know.
The future for the Nationals is bright, though first base remains muddled. Perhaps if Nick remains healthy all year, the team might offer him an incentive-laden deal to return in 2010. All I know is that there is likely a hole at first for the next two or three years, and it would be great if Nick Johnson was healthy enough to fill it.
Nick Johnson was the team's starting first baseman long before the Expos moved to Washington in 2004. But since first donning the "Curly W," he has been available for just 48% of his team's games, missing all of 2007 and 120 games last year. His four year contract is up this year, and his age (31) and frequent injuries make it a near-certainty that he won't be resigned this off-season. Because he won't bring a compensation pick as a free agent, he'll likely be traded before the July 31st trade deadline.
The Nationals have two players in their Minor League pipeline who could eventually take over first base, but neither of them are close to being ready. Twenty-three year old Bill Rhinehart, an 11th round pick in 2007, has looked good thus far, batting .278-23-132 in 719 at-bats. However, he's started slowly for Harrisburg, batting just .139 in limited play.
Chris Marrero is the heir apparent, but after one good season two years ago, he fractured his ankle early in 2008 and missed the second half of the season. He returned this spring in the best shape of his career, and he's hitting well for Potomac, but he's only 19 and it will be at least two more years, maybe three, before he's ready to take on major league pitching.
Adam Dunn can play first-that was my choice heading into Opening Day-but his defensive liabilities were exposed during the World Baseball Classic in March.
No, he needs to stay in the outfield.
The other surprise is not that he's still healthy (that's not a surprise, it's a miracle) but rather the way Nick Johnson is playing. As the cleanup hitter in 2005 and 2006, Johnson swung for power, hitting 23 homers in 2006. But this year, things are different.
Johnson has been placed in the number-two hole in the lineup and has been asked to get on base for Ryan Zimmerman, Adam Dunn and Elijah Dukes. The change in his numbers are staggering.
He has 19 hits in 50 at-bats this year (.380) but just two of those hits are for extra bases, both doubles. In a full season (500 at-bats), Johnson would have 180 hits, 20 doubles and no home runs. Compare that to 2006 (46 doubles, 23 homers) and it's obvious that Johnson has changed his hitting style for the good of the team.
Instead of pulling the ball down the first base line, and hitting line drives into the right field gap, Johnson is poking soft line drives over the shortstop's head. He's also walking less, though his on-base percent of .446 is still amazing. Johnson has walked in 18% of his at-bats during his career, but just 10% in 2009.
That's what makes Johnson such a great talent. He is able to do what the team needs. He can hit for power, he can take a walk, and he can be a singles hitter.
And while his defense is not Gold Glove quality, it's very, very close.
It's sad that the Nationals are going to have to give up on him, but past history demands it. That said, Mike Rizzo gave up on Shawn Hill earlier this spring, and he's currently playing very well for the San Diego Padres. In two starts and ten innings, Hill is 1-0 for San Diego with a 3.60 ERA, striking out six while walking just two.
So you never know.
The future for the Nationals is bright, though first base remains muddled. Perhaps if Nick remains healthy all year, the team might offer him an incentive-laden deal to return in 2010. All I know is that there is likely a hole at first for the next two or three years, and it would be great if Nick Johnson was healthy enough to fill it.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
In one of his first media interviews back in 2004, then General Manager Jim Bowden made it very clear that first priority-his only priority really-was to stock the Nationals' barren farm system with pitching talent. "You develop pitchers," Bowden said, "and you find the bats through trades and free agency."
And so we watched as all those unknown names with a "P" next to their name were taken in the amateur draft in 2005, and 2006, and 2007, and we happily waited for them to mature from minor league prospect into a major league pitcher.
And we waited.
In 2005, Marco Estrada was taken in the 6th round, Jack Spradlin in the 8th, and John Lannan in the 11th. Craig Stammen came one round later. In 2006, the Nationals added Colten Willems in the 1st round, Cory Van Allen in the 5th, Cole Kimball in the 12th and Hassan Pena in the 13th. Ross Detwiler (1st), Josh Smoker (1st), Jordan Zimmermann (2nd), Jack McGeary (6th) and Adrian Alaniz (12th) came in 2007.
And still we waited.
Um .... excuse me, Jimbo, how long does it take to develop major league pitchers?
Among those players, perhaps a half dozen were expected to blossom into capable big leaguers, almost none of them have shown that they might pitch in the major leagues one day.
The answer is, then, that it takes a very long time to develop a major league pitcher. For the Nationals, from those thirteen respected minor league prospects, one player-John Lannan-has successfully made the transition to the major leagues.
And Lannan was an 11th round pick. Ross Detwiler, the much heralded first round selection in 2007, who was supposed to already be in the Nationals' rotation, had a rough year at Potomac (A) last year and isn't looking much better at Harrisburg (AA) in 2009.
An 11th round pick succeeds where a first rounder struggles.
Go figure.
To this point, I don't think any of us knew exactly what a "real" pitching prospect looked like and therefore didn't know what to expect. Was Detwiler making satisfactory progress? Who knew?
That is, until Jordan Zimmermann entered the scene. Zimmermann, as a second round pick, came from a cold weather state (Wisconsin) and a Division III college (Wisconsin Stevens-Point).
He was a total unknown.
Lannan's rise to the major leagues was meteoric. In less than three minor league seasons, Lannan compiled a 21-16, 3.89 record, very good for the minors. Well, if that was meteoric, then Jordan Zimmermann got to the majors at warp 8.
Zimmermann, in less than two full seasons in the minors, compiled a record of 15-5, 2.74 with a tremendous WHIP (base runners allowed per inning) of 1.17. By way of comparison, Roger Clemens had the same 1.17 WHIP over his major league career.
In other words, that's pretty good.
Clemens spent parts of two seasons in the minors before joining the Red Sox. Jake Peavy joined the Padres in less than three years, the same as Greg Maddux. Tom Glavine arrived after two years.
The point I'm making is that while many all-star hitters remain in the minors for four or five years, the star pitchers tend to land in the majors much faster. The average time spent in the minors for the last eight National League ERA leaders is 2.7 years. Further, when they get there, they tend to stay there.
How good is Jordan Zimmermann? It's hard to say after just one game, but Washington Post sportswriter Dave Sheinin talked to a scout who watched Zimmermann pitch against the Braves on Tuesday. Sheinin said that this particular scout is usually conservative in his opinion, which makes his opinion even more impressive:
"I really like him. Everybody talks about his velocity, but I like the potential for both of his breaking balls. His slider is very good. Once he finds his true velocity, I think he'll eventually pitch at 92 [mph] with two very good breaking balls. His change up is his worst pitch, but he has the potential to be a true four-pitch pitcher.
That last paragraph is most telling. If Zimmermann is "as advertised," and the Nationals' sign Steven Strasburg as anticipated, the Nationals could have-as quickly as 2010-two number-one starters in their rotation. John Lannan would then become the number-three starter, which is what most scouts believe he is. Add Scott Olsen and Shairon Martis and the Nationals could have a formidable rotation, and sooner rather than later.
The Nationals' starters had a 13.20 ERA in their first starts this season, and a 4.84 ERA the second time through the rotation. The third time was the charm, as the starters-including Zimmermann-posted a 2.67 ERA.
It's vogue to scoff at the Washington Nationals these days, and it drives me crazy because these so-called experts are basing their opinions on that 1-10 start and not the reason for the start or the true ability of the team.
I think the Nationals will make up for that horrid start over the course of the year and still think they can reach 75 wins if they can avoid another long losing streak.
And if Steven Strasburg is the real deal? Then it just might be a very special year.
And so we watched as all those unknown names with a "P" next to their name were taken in the amateur draft in 2005, and 2006, and 2007, and we happily waited for them to mature from minor league prospect into a major league pitcher.
And we waited.
In 2005, Marco Estrada was taken in the 6th round, Jack Spradlin in the 8th, and John Lannan in the 11th. Craig Stammen came one round later. In 2006, the Nationals added Colten Willems in the 1st round, Cory Van Allen in the 5th, Cole Kimball in the 12th and Hassan Pena in the 13th. Ross Detwiler (1st), Josh Smoker (1st), Jordan Zimmermann (2nd), Jack McGeary (6th) and Adrian Alaniz (12th) came in 2007.
And still we waited.
Um .... excuse me, Jimbo, how long does it take to develop major league pitchers?
Among those players, perhaps a half dozen were expected to blossom into capable big leaguers, almost none of them have shown that they might pitch in the major leagues one day.
The answer is, then, that it takes a very long time to develop a major league pitcher. For the Nationals, from those thirteen respected minor league prospects, one player-John Lannan-has successfully made the transition to the major leagues.
And Lannan was an 11th round pick. Ross Detwiler, the much heralded first round selection in 2007, who was supposed to already be in the Nationals' rotation, had a rough year at Potomac (A) last year and isn't looking much better at Harrisburg (AA) in 2009.
An 11th round pick succeeds where a first rounder struggles.
Go figure.
To this point, I don't think any of us knew exactly what a "real" pitching prospect looked like and therefore didn't know what to expect. Was Detwiler making satisfactory progress? Who knew?
That is, until Jordan Zimmermann entered the scene. Zimmermann, as a second round pick, came from a cold weather state (Wisconsin) and a Division III college (Wisconsin Stevens-Point).
He was a total unknown.
Lannan's rise to the major leagues was meteoric. In less than three minor league seasons, Lannan compiled a 21-16, 3.89 record, very good for the minors. Well, if that was meteoric, then Jordan Zimmermann got to the majors at warp 8.
Zimmermann, in less than two full seasons in the minors, compiled a record of 15-5, 2.74 with a tremendous WHIP (base runners allowed per inning) of 1.17. By way of comparison, Roger Clemens had the same 1.17 WHIP over his major league career.
In other words, that's pretty good.
Clemens spent parts of two seasons in the minors before joining the Red Sox. Jake Peavy joined the Padres in less than three years, the same as Greg Maddux. Tom Glavine arrived after two years.
The point I'm making is that while many all-star hitters remain in the minors for four or five years, the star pitchers tend to land in the majors much faster. The average time spent in the minors for the last eight National League ERA leaders is 2.7 years. Further, when they get there, they tend to stay there.
How good is Jordan Zimmermann? It's hard to say after just one game, but Washington Post sportswriter Dave Sheinin talked to a scout who watched Zimmermann pitch against the Braves on Tuesday. Sheinin said that this particular scout is usually conservative in his opinion, which makes his opinion even more impressive:
"I really like him. Everybody talks about his velocity, but I like the potential for both of his breaking balls. His slider is very good. Once he finds his true velocity, I think he'll eventually pitch at 92 [mph] with two very good breaking balls. His change up is his worst pitch, but he has the potential to be a true four-pitch pitcher.
"I had him topped out at 95, but he was really comfortable at 92, 93, and I think that's where he's going to settle in. The one thing that bothers me in his delivery is [that] he flies open a little bit. And his command in the strike zone -- he throws a lot of strikes, but they weren't all necessarily quality strikes. He was getting hit hardest on his fastballs. His fastball command was a little less consistent than I'm sure he would've liked.
"I think he's going to be a solid rotation guy -- or maybe better than that. He has the potential to be a [number] 1 or 2. If I had to pencil him right now, I'd call him a 2. But I tell you, if they draft [Stephen] Strasburg and get him signed, and if this kid [Zimmermann] does what he's supposed to do, that's a hell of a back-to-back. If they come up with a third pitcher, they're the Florida Marlins. They could really have something here."That last paragraph is most telling. If Zimmermann is "as advertised," and the Nationals' sign Steven Strasburg as anticipated, the Nationals could have-as quickly as 2010-two number-one starters in their rotation. John Lannan would then become the number-three starter, which is what most scouts believe he is. Add Scott Olsen and Shairon Martis and the Nationals could have a formidable rotation, and sooner rather than later.
The Nationals' starters had a 13.20 ERA in their first starts this season, and a 4.84 ERA the second time through the rotation. The third time was the charm, as the starters-including Zimmermann-posted a 2.67 ERA.
It's vogue to scoff at the Washington Nationals these days, and it drives me crazy because these so-called experts are basing their opinions on that 1-10 start and not the reason for the start or the true ability of the team.
I think the Nationals will make up for that horrid start over the course of the year and still think they can reach 75 wins if they can avoid another long losing streak.
And if Steven Strasburg is the real deal? Then it just might be a very special year.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
