Rule 5 Selections


Nationals select Jamie Hoffman from the Dodgers. He’ll be dealt to the Yankees to complete the Brian Bruney deal.

Additionally, the Nationals lost RHP Zech Zinicola to the Toronto Blue Jays. A Dana Brown choice no doubt

Nationals take RHP Arismendy Mota from White Sox, LHP Michael Wlodarczyk from Tampa, and CF Nicholas Moresi from Houston in Triple-A portion of the draft and lose RHP Ruben De La Rosa to Toronto and RHP Terrence Engles to Seattle in the Triple-A portion. These guys are typically roster filler.

In the Double-A portion, the Nationals did not select a player but lost RHP Johan Figureo to the New York Mets. Figuereo was originally an OF who had converted to pitching over the past couple of seasons. Still a roster filler exercise.

  1. #1 by VladiHondo - December 10th, 2009 at 10:22

    Good pick for the Jays, maybe getting him away from Spin will enable him to go back to his 1st year level of play (stats very similar to Storen’s 1st year).

  2. #2 by cass - December 10th, 2009 at 10:43

    So Wilkie remains a Nat?

  3. #3 by Positively Half St. - December 10th, 2009 at 10:53

    We had high hopes for Zech, and good for him. I am excited to keep Wilkie.

  4. #4 by John - December 10th, 2009 at 10:55

    Mota looks interesting. I wonder if they think he’s a late bloomer along the lines of Severino.

    The other two guys do seem like roster filler as Brian said.

  5. #5 by natsfan07 - December 10th, 2009 at 11:10

    Congrats to Zinicola! Great guy and sad to see him leave the Nats. Josh Wilkie will remain a Nats for the time being.

  6. #6 by Todd Boss - December 10th, 2009 at 11:14

    Surprised about Zinicola; somehow I doubt he survives the year on their MLB roster and we’ll gain something in a trade. The only other guy I was worried about losing in rule5 was Erik Arneson.

  7. #7 by VladiHondo - December 10th, 2009 at 11:26

    I liked Ruben de la Rosa, a major force behind the GCL crown, 0.96 ERA, 28 IP, 10 BB, 44 K’s = plus 3 more playoff IP and 3 K’s with no runs.

    Darn you Dana Brown!

  8. #8 by Jake - December 10th, 2009 at 11:29

    Why don’t we ever mention Aroldis Chapman? If he is as good as they say why not lock him up long-term in DC? Futire rotation of 1. Stephen Strasburg 2. Aroldis Chapman 3. Jordan Zimmermann 4. John Lannan 5. Bradley Meyers

    what do you guys think??

  9. #9 by markfd - December 10th, 2009 at 11:35

    Good luck to Zech! I liked what I saw of him, hopefully this is a start of a long big league career for him.

    PHEW…glad we got to hold onto our other guys.

  10. #10 by Jeff E. - December 10th, 2009 at 12:08

    Michael W. was an ex-po pick out of highschool. Brian, minor question: Marlins terminate contract for Dustin Dickerson. What was the story behind that and would the same scout who combed him out of H.S. still be around or would Dana Brown have more interest IF his future is not permanently affected by injury????

  11. #11 by Sue Dinem - December 10th, 2009 at 12:36

    Jake :

    If he is as good as they say why not lock him up long-term in DC?

    Because he’s not as good as they say and there are whispers he’s not 21, either. I don’t think anyone but the usual suspects has the cash to burn for a project with so many question marks.

    As Baseball Intellect’s Alex Eisenberg put it:

    Chapman is going to be a risk for whatever team signs him. His upside is tremendous, but he’s raw in every sense of the word. Does he have the mental capacity to turn himself into a pitcher and not be just a thrower? Does a team’s development staff have a good track record in developing a talent like Chapman? Does Chapman have what it takes to put it all together and develop into a legitimate number one starter? We’ll eventually get our answers, but some team will have to shell out millions of dollars before getting them.

    Rest of his scouting report can be found here.

  12. #12 by tyrusray367 - December 10th, 2009 at 14:09

    “I don’t think anyone but the usual suspects has the cash to burn for a project with so many question marks.”

    If there is one thing the Nationals should have is cash to burn. Chapman may be older than 21, he may not have the mental makeup to be a elite level starter in the bigs but he has the physical tools. And all they have to do to add him is PAY him. No draft picks, no players lost just open the checkbook and BOOM top tier prospect close the the majors is in your system.

    There is zero chance, none, nada that Pudge Rodriguez earns the $6m he’s getting. Chapman might be a total waste but he might pay out 10x what he gets. A team with consecutive 100 loss seasons and little help in the pipeline needs to gamble not play it safe.

  13. #13 by John - December 10th, 2009 at 14:29

    Dave Sheinin says the Nats are trading Mota to the Cubs.

  14. #14 by Pilchard - December 10th, 2009 at 14:31

    I can understand the concern about going after Chapman. The Nats paid $15 million to lock up Strasburg for 6 years, and due to the fragility of pitchers, some question whether the Nats will get a return on their investment.

    Chapman has far more questionmarks, does not have SS’s talent, and will require more $$$ for less years than SS. If anything, the money that will be spent to sign Chapman further validate the importance of the MLB draft as Chapman will likely cost more than any team has ever spent on their entire draft class.

    I would rather have the Nats be very agressive in 2010 draft by drafting and signing talented players that slip due to signability concerns.

  15. #15 by Kirkie - December 10th, 2009 at 15:43

    Zech Segovia released to make way for Pudge, apparently (per Nats Journal)

  16. #16 by Gavin B - December 10th, 2009 at 15:50

    And, the Mets signed Clint Everts. He certainly made good on his first year ever in AA and AAA.

  17. #17 by Pilchard - December 10th, 2009 at 16:13

    Was Everts the last player in the organization that was drafted by the Expos?

  18. #18 by Brian Oliver - December 10th, 2009 at 16:27

    Bergmann was a 2002 draft pick like Everts

  19. #19 by Brian Oliver - December 10th, 2009 at 16:31

    there are still quite a few Expo guys

    Bergmann (02D) Bernadina (01 IFA) Desmond (04D) Leonard Davis (04D) Seth Bynum (04 non-draft F/A) Marvin Lowrance (04D) Carlos Martinez (04 IFA) Devin Ivany (04D) Brian Peacock (04D – signed by Nats as draft-and-follow in 05) Randy Matias (04 IFA)

  20. #20 by Brian Oliver - December 10th, 2009 at 16:33

    and Collin Balester as well

  21. #21 by Brian Oliver - December 10th, 2009 at 16:34

    and Atahualpa Severino

  22. #22 by Brian Oliver - December 10th, 2009 at 16:36

    and Chris Lugo

  23. #23 by hoo - December 10th, 2009 at 16:56

    Brian: How does the Nats having the most Rule 5 losses 4 square with our farm system being rated near the bottom by some folks.

    I take it this more b/c our farm system is devoid of top talent but we have really good roster filler. That the fruit of our talent stockpiling has been having a lot of really good AA and AAAA guys due to trades/high draft picks.

  24. #24 by Brian Oliver - December 10th, 2009 at 17:06

    hoo – I would not necessarily read too much into the Triple- and Double-A losses. Those end up being primarily roster filler type moves.

    The fact they lost Zinicola in the major league phase is a result of Dana Brown more than anything else. Zinicola could still turn into a fungible middle reliever but his link to Brown likely explains his selection more than anything else

  25. #25 by Louis J - December 10th, 2009 at 17:25

    Anybody interested in trading for Josh Johnson of the Marlins? I believe he has 2 yrs of arbitration remaining and Marlins will trade him before his walk year. It will involve some prospects such as Marrero, Espinosa and young pitcher.

  26. #26 by WallyBall - December 10th, 2009 at 17:34

    Regarding Hoffman, if the yanks give up on him, do they offer him straight back to the Dodgers, or the Nats first? If Nats, does that mean that they would have the chance to keep him if they met the MLB roster requirement?

  27. #27 by BinM - December 10th, 2009 at 20:23

    Louis J: I could maybe see J. Johnson being a steady #2 for the Nationals, but there is no way I’d want to give up Espinosa for him in a trade. Marrero, & a couple other expendible prospects maybe, but not a MI at this point.

  28. #28 by Hoagie - December 11th, 2009 at 00:47

    If the Marlins really turned down Smoak and Feliz for Johnson as rumored, there is absolutely no chance that the Nats could make an offer the Fish would look at.

  29. #29 by Jane - December 11th, 2009 at 01:00

    Zech and Clint, much continued success with your new baseball clubs!

    Segovia, you will be missed!!

    Thanks, guys, for all the autographs, when you were in Harrisburg!!!

  30. #30 by Andrew Stebbins - December 11th, 2009 at 01:49

    Hoagie :If the Marlins really turned down Smoak and Feliz for Johnson as rumored, there is absolutely no chance that the Nats could make an offer the Fish would look at.

    Not a true rumor; however, the Nationals do not have nearly enough to get Johnson. Unless you want to give up Strasburg (who has yet to do anything at the major league level) but keep his contract on our books.

  31. #31 by Louis J. - December 11th, 2009 at 09:40

    I think Josh Johnson is a great young #1 or #2 starter and would be willing to trade good prospects for him. Remember, he already had his TJ Surgery and has totally recovered and should get stronger over time. I’d offer 3 of the following prospect: Chris Marrero, Josh Smoker, Derek Norris, Destin Hood, Michael Burgess & Ross Detwiler. Of course, I would make the trade conditioned on the fact that I can sign Johnson to a 5 yr contract within 72 hrs after the trade is made (ala Johan Santana).

  32. #32 by Louis J. - December 11th, 2009 at 09:51

    Since Strasburg was mentioned, I would also search out a possible trade for him (of course after the 2010 draft when he would be eligible to be traded). Remember, Jordan Zimmermann and Davis Price cases. Strasburg has that “magic” as the best young pitching prospect since ???? Teams would not turn down a chance for him to be part of their team. I would again turn to the Marlins who have a $$$ problem and trade Stephen Strasburg, Ian Desmond and Danny Espinosa or Jeff Kobernus for Hanley Ramirez who is under contract until 2014. Remember, if Zimmermann has a successful recovery, the Nats would still have a hard throwing RHP for 2011 and thereafter and would still have the #1 pick in the 2010 draft to find another young pitcher.

  33. #33 by Sue Dinem - December 11th, 2009 at 10:09

    Louis J – Is your offscreen name Omar Minaya?

  34. #34 by exporam - December 11th, 2009 at 10:45

    Nice one Sue.

    I think Nolasco would be a better target. Maybe for a Detwiler, Jaime, McGeary/Smoker? That might be too much to give up since that’s 4 guys that have high ceilings. Obviously they haven’t realized a fraction of it yet, but if one of the four could…..

    What about trying to get something from the Tigers on the cheap since they are trying to get $ off the books?

  35. #35 by Louis J - December 11th, 2009 at 11:27

    Sue Dinem

    No. its Brian Cashman !!!

  36. #36 by Louis J - December 11th, 2009 at 11:42

    Sue and Exporam

    Remember, thinking like the Nats (getting something on the cheat) will continue to get us a team that plays like the Nats now and in the future. Prospects are not things to look out and day-dream about some future possibility. Prospects are only good for two things: either they have what it takes to become a ML starting player (Ryan Zimmerman, Jesus Flores) or to be used in a trade for a ML starting player. Our system has very, very few A/B rated players (that’s why were are rated #26) which means the future is not looking good. If I can find two ML starting players ( ML All-Stars) like Josh Johnson and Hanley Ramirez, I’d trade whoever I have in my #26 rated system to get them. That’s what Brian Cashman would do to rebuild the Nats!

  37. #37 by Louis J - December 11th, 2009 at 12:01

    Thinking like Brian Cashman would result in signing Adan Dunn to a 4yr extension to play 1B (and drafting Bryce what-his-name to play 1B in the future) signing Orlando Husdon to play 2B and hit #2 in the lineup (developing either Espinosa/Kobernus to play 2B in the future and trading Guzman), trading for Josh Johnson and Hanley Ramirez resulting in an infield of Dunn, Hudson, Ramirez, Zimmerman & Flores. Cashman would sign 2 ML starters like Garland & Piniero to long term contracts to go with Johnson, Lannan & Stammen as starting rotation. And, finish it off by signing Fernando Rodney as his closer to go with Bruney, MacDungal, Clippard, Martin (long relief), Burnett (L), Slaten (L) and/or Chico (L) for the bullpen. By then the $$$ would have run-out for 2010 and he would have be satisfied with Willingham, Morgan, Dukes, Harris & Maxwell as his OF which he can improve on in 2011. Cashman’s lineup would be Morgan, Hudson, Ramirez, Dunn, Zimmerman, Willingham, Dukes & Flores by July, 2010.

  38. #38 by Sue Dinem - December 11th, 2009 at 13:04

    I had no idea Brian Cashman was that stupid.

    The problem with this lovely chimera is that it presumes that these FAs will sign with the Nationals. This just in: Washington is the Siberia of the majors. The only FAs we’re going to attract right now are guys that either have an injury problem, an attitude problem, or want to start immediately at any cost. I’d also say “past their prime,” but that horse has been beaten in the Natmosphere like the Pittsburgh Steelers for the past month.

    Furthermore, Cashman is able to trade for player because… wait for it… he has a farm system that has more than a few legitimate prospects. How many blue-chip prospects will Washington have left after trading for Johnson and Ramirez, assuming we even have enough right now? I’ll give you a hint: It ends with “o” and starts with “z.”

  39. #39 by exporam - December 11th, 2009 at 14:13

    IF we could deal Guzman AND know that Hudson would come, I would love that, even if it were an overpay. We don’t have what it would take to get Hanley and probably Johnson. Nolasco is a little more reasonable and I am fine with trading most prospects not named Storen, Strasburg, or Norris.

    If we could have Dunn, Hudson, Desmond, Zimmerman, Willingham, Nyjer, Dukes in the field next year with a staff of Nolasco, Lannan, (healthy), Garland, Olsen, take your pick of Stammen/Balester/Detwiler/Martin/Martis/Mock/Olsen with a pen of FA, Storen, Bruney, McDougal, Clippard, Burnett I would be ecstatic!!!

  40. #40 by exporam - December 11th, 2009 at 14:19

    healthy Olsen is what I meant….

  41. #41 by Louis J - December 11th, 2009 at 15:30

    Sue

    “that these FA’s will sign with”…Get with it, Johnson and Ramirez are not free agents ! They would be obtained in a trade which does not need their approval. One is age 24 and the other is age 25. And, we have only 1 blue chip prospect- not many. And stupid Cashman just traded 3 high prospects to get an aging CF from Tigers. And, he uses his farm system to trade with not to save for rainy day. The Nats need to win 95-99 games a year to be in the “hunt”. What combination of players on the 40-man roster or in the minors can we find to win another 35-40 games a years. You have to think championships (World Series) to win championships. Stupid Brian Cashman has done that better than the Nats/Expos brass who are only interested in winning more games than last year !!!

  42. #42 by Louis J - December 11th, 2009 at 15:51

    exporam

    First, you don’t trade Guzman until you have signed Hudson. Remember to think like Cashman not like Rizzo. With the Marlins poor financial situation (no money,very small attendance and no outside income/cable revenue), they need a small payroll ($14-$18) to stay solvent annually. They have been dumping players (Willingham & Olsen to Nats) for the past few years who are eligible for arbitration in order to stay within the above $$$ range. They will lose Josh Johnson in two years. And, as Ramirez’s contract salary starts to rise and as teams start to pitch around him with nobody else in the lineup for protection, his numbers will decrease and his future value will be adversely affected. God forgive if he should gat hurt before they can trade him!!Therefore, he too will be traded soon than later. The ecomonic times have caused more stress on the Marlins because their owner is not a very rich man who can afford bad times. If we overpay with prospects now – by trading him the best draft in the history of baseball who has a very favorable 5 yr contract- we may be able trade for Ramirez now.

  43. #43 by Rich - December 11th, 2009 at 15:54

    MLB traderumors says the Cubs acquired righty Arismendy Mota from the Nationals for cash considerations.

    What are cash considerations? Why would we bother doing this? I don’t quite get it.

    Thanks to anyone who can answer this

  44. #44 by Brian Oliver - December 11th, 2009 at 15:59

    Rich – It could be as simple as the fact that the Cubs were interested in Mota and worried that he would not be there when they picked. They basically paid the Nats to pick him first so they would be sure to get him. It would imply that there was no one in the Triple-A phase of the R5 draft that really appealed to them more than the cash from the Cubs

  45. #45 by Sue Dinem - December 11th, 2009 at 16:39

    Sue “that these FA’s will sign with”…Get with it, Johnson and Ramirez are not free agents !

    But these two guys are…

    Cashman would sign 2 ML starters like Garland & Piniero to long term[sic] contracts
  46. #46 by Jeff E. - December 11th, 2009 at 16:41

    I would love to be paid 3 mill a year for flashing the one finger down to kids on the bump since my plate blocking skills are way behind me, my play calling is non-existent and my clubhouse diplomacy has always been in question. So, where does the kid who was 5 when I lived in his hometown of Concord, CA, play after being drafted off Astros, brian,- POT?

  47. #47 by Brian Oliver - December 11th, 2009 at 16:45

    I bet he ends up in Harrisburg

  48. #48 by Louis J - December 11th, 2009 at 16:52

    Sue

    For Garland & Piniero who are in the early 30’s, money talks. This will be their last chance for a big contract. And, they don’t care who the team is!!! Piniero made $7.5m last year and a healthy 3/4 year contract will do the job. Garland will need a 5 year contract. That extra year on each contract is very important in closing the deal (the way the Nats have to overpay). Remember what Scott Boros said about the Pudge Rodriguez deal. “Teams offered more money for one year but the Nats were the only team that offered a two year contract. That extra year was important”. Also, the Braves signed Derek Lowe because they offered that extra year. Offer the right type of contract and they can sign these two starters. Only Doc Holloday and John Lackey are interested in signing with a contender.

  49. #49 by Sue Dinem - December 11th, 2009 at 17:26

    Louis J – Maybe if they consumed what you have they might, but Gil Meche is the last FA I can think of that signed with a 100-loss team, and I’m willing to bet he regrets its.

  50. #50 by Dick - December 12th, 2009 at 16:41

    Scott Olsen non-tendered.

    That is one of the strangest rules in baseball; that is, injured arbitration-eligible players almost can’t be resigned by their old team due to the 80% rule. Since the Nats would have had to have offered at least 80% of Olsen’s old contract under arbitration rules, they didn’t want to do that for a two-game winner.

    Sue, nice picture of Louis. Wish he’d keeps his thoughts to Nats journal like the rest of his ilk instead of trying to ruin Brian’s good works here!

  51. #51 by Louis J. - December 12th, 2009 at 18:16

    Dick

    Message received..See you folks at the games. Merry Christmas….

  52. #52 by JayB - December 12th, 2009 at 19:04

    Good Luck in the classroom, hope you are able to foster respect for diversity of opinions there…….seems here disrespect and bulling is the norm from you regulars.

  53. #53 by MiLB Fan - December 13th, 2009 at 00:35

    Jay B – There are certain regulars who believe they are more knowledgeable and therefore more entitled to their opinions than the rest, but most of the posters are respectful of others opinions. Brian does tell people to mind their p’s and q’s when it goes too far.

    This site does maintain a much more pleasant tone than fan forum.

    Brian – good luck to you in your new field. Stock up on vitamin C – you will need it for the first year!

  54. #54 by Jeff E. - December 13th, 2009 at 06:12

    Looks like AdaFox is the winter adddition to the Big Board @ 3b for HARR. same for the Atlantic league OF, carl Lodenthal, Brian?

  55. #55 by Jeff E. - December 13th, 2009 at 06:13

    Adam Fox. early morning in San Juan.

  56. #56 by HB3 - December 13th, 2009 at 06:37

    Ugh… That was painful reading through all 52 comments in one sitting! Especially the triple-crown from #35-37; and is it just me or did someone’s name magically ‘pull a Smiley’ between #51 and #52, because teh spelllingg And syntax are eriely similur…

    Now that the Bruney deal is complete and Olsen plus MacDougal have been cut loose, I’ll be interested to see how the pitching staff is filled out. Olsen’s comments make him sound like a safe bet to return to the Nats (provided they want to re-sign him,) but it sounds like the FO managed to piss-off Big Mac… So does anyone have thoughts on whether or not one or both non-tenders will be back next season???

  57. #57 by HB3 - December 13th, 2009 at 06:47

    Jeff E. :

    Looks like AdaFox is the winter adddition to the Big Board @ 3b for HARR. same for the Atlantic league OF, carl Lodenthal, Brian?

    Hmmm… The Nats signed Lodenthal? Too bad we can’t see him here in Richmond anymore. That is, unless he comes to town to face-off against the Flying Squirrels…

  58. #58 by Jeff E. - December 13th, 2009 at 07:53

    Lodenthal must be an old Braves farm hand.

  59. #59 by Dick - December 13th, 2009 at 22:23

    Nats resign Olsen! Good, no risk move.

  60. #60 by JayB - December 14th, 2009 at 05:21

    I like the Olsen move as long as it is in addition to 2 FA proven starters not named Livo. Brian, am I right in thinking even the $1 Mill is at risk if the “Hill” him early enough in ST? If he comes in and is throwing Patterson or Chad like fastballs they will only have to pay a fraction of the contract to cut him right?

  61. #61 by JayB - December 14th, 2009 at 05:24

    “NOT” at risk

  62. #62 by Nats fan in NJ - December 14th, 2009 at 08:32

    Love the Olsen re-sign. Not just that it happened, but the speed with which they re-signed him.

  63. #63 by Pilchard - December 14th, 2009 at 17:52

    MLBtraderumors is reporting that the Nats are among the teams in the mix for reliever Matt Capps. If the Nats sign Capps, they would not lose a draft pick as the Pirates did not offer him arbitration.

  64. #64 by Mark L - December 14th, 2009 at 19:11

    I agree on Capps, he would be perfect for the Nats right now. He has too many hiccups to be a regular closer, but has very good stuff and would be terrific in the 7th or 8th.

  65. #65 by JayB - December 14th, 2009 at 20:40

    Capps would be fine to add inventory but I would rather they stay focused on 2 proven 200 inning starters not named Livo. Jon Garland and Jason M are what they must get. Add Smoltz too if you want icing for the new pull pen.

  66. #66 by exporam - December 15th, 2009 at 11:11

    Not a fan of Jason M and the price tag he is likely to have. Garland and a reasonable trade for Nolasco would be my wish.

  67. #67 by NICK - December 15th, 2009 at 15:26

    Totally off-topic, but I gotta say, if/when the Halladay trade is completed, the new G.M of the Jays ( a fellow Montrealer) should win GM of the year hands down. D’arnaud, Aumont, Wallace, Drabek, and Gillies for Halladay? – Wow!

  68. #68 by Jake - December 15th, 2009 at 15:33

    NICK: the reporters are saying that Gillies is going to Philadelphia and that Aumont is not included in the trade

  69. #69 by NICK - December 15th, 2009 at 15:38

    Thanks Jake. Right after I wrote that, I saw the latest update with the info. you mentioned. Still an impressive haul nonetheless.

  70. #70 by Pilchard - December 16th, 2009 at 10:55

    Jason Marquis apparently has the Nats at the top of his list. He is like a younger version of Livo: good hitting pitcher, throws strikes, eats innings, and gives up lots of runs.

  71. #71 by Paul - December 17th, 2009 at 16:09

    A decades worth of mismanagement =

    http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=caple_jim&id=4750589

    Rizzo still has a lot of work to do, particularly on our reputation!

  72. #72 by Jeff E. - December 18th, 2009 at 10:00

    marquis seems more like going home to NYC. pass on Garland. amazing what today a 14-16 record can get you in the open market. we might as well add another LHP to eat IPs and counter the three PHILs LHbats, the Mets ANDany more the Fish sign. interesting to see who plays 2b this early season with Espinoza.

  73. #73 by Cole - December 18th, 2009 at 10:05

    This from Buster Olney:

    A veteran scout on Bryce Harper, the presumptive No. 1 pick in next year’s draft: “The kid plays really, really hard.”

    How hard?

    “Like Kirk Gibson-hard,” said the evaluator.

  74. #74 by Jeff E. - December 18th, 2009 at 15:00

    My flight back to MIA just cancelled here in San Juan where the patio/pool bar beckons….the San Juan Sun wrote up Edgardo baez’s 23 game hit streak. Brian or whomever-is he still in play for Nats 2010 despite his 50 game suspension! El presidente, raised to Natnation!!!

  75. #75 by BinM - December 18th, 2009 at 20:01

    If the Nationals are going FA for the pitching staff, Garland & Marquis are pretty similar in terms of basic statistical comps, imo. Grab the one who will agree to a two-year deal, then get Smoltz for a spot-starter / bottom of rotation role (& his knowledge).

    Getting Capps for the BP would give Bruney some competition for the closer gig to start the season. Unless he’s ‘lights-out’ in Viera & makes the club, stash Storen at SYR until mid-season.

  76. #76 by JayB - December 18th, 2009 at 20:44

    BiM,

    Time is wasting again. FO has really done very little and now B Kerr is talking about Brett Myers…..that hurts….yet again they just can not seem to do what they need to do. O’s and Mariners have both had much better winters.

    Year after year we talk about what the Nats need and year after year they fail to get it…..Pitching. Sign Garland and Marquis…BOTH to 3 year deals and get it done. Sign Smotlz to a large one year deal and they will be a .500 team. If not they are a 100 loss team yet again. Are the Lerners really this clueless?

  77. #77 by Jake - December 18th, 2009 at 22:05

    Why is everyone saying that Bruney should be closer? Has anyone seen Storen’s stats from this year? And he did the same in the AFL with all the top prospects. He should be our closer and has the potential to be an incredibly skilled deadly closer. What do you guys think? If we dont sign Capps then is Bruney really good enough to be a closer?

  78. #78 by BinM - December 18th, 2009 at 22:22

    JayB: I tend to be a bit more cautious than you, particularly in a ’soft’ FA year. The addition of either Garland or Marquis as an interim #1 would be a definite plus; adding both could stunt the development of SP’s at lower levels in the system, and cost the parent club in the long run, imo.

    With the current roster, it looks like Lannan, Stammen, & a battle for the final three spots between seven pitchers (Balester, Detwiler, Estrada, Martin, Martis, Mock, & Olsen) to start the 2010 season; That’s not good. I personally think Estrada & Mock are 4-A pitchers, better suited for the bullpen at the ML level . Atilano, Jaime, Strasburg & Thompson are still on (or over) the horizon, if they ever make it at all, and J. Zimmermann won’t be available until 2011.

    Adding either Garland or Marquis (on a 2-year+ option @ $8-9M/yr) could give the Nationals stability at the top of the rotation, and some breathing room for pitchers like Balester, Detwiler, Martis, Strasburg & others to figure it out in the minors before taking the big step. Smoltz at the back-end of the rotation (or in the bullpen) could serve as a mentor to the entire staff, as well as a functional arm.

  79. #79 by JayB - December 18th, 2009 at 22:55

    BinM,

    That’s not good is a significant understatement. We know just how bad Balester, Detwiler, Estrada, Martin, Mock and Olsen. Stammen is a middle reliever at best. It is 6 years into Nats and 3rd Year into new Park. Time to do what is need to win. Signing Garland and Marquis blocks AAA trash at best.

    Sign them both and you have Lannan, Garland, Marquis, Detwiler and Strasburg for 2010. Then trade one of them and add ZimmNN back into rotation for 2011. If anyone else produces then you can trad the Vets with some cash if needed in 2011.

  80. #80 by Guy Holly - December 19th, 2009 at 12:35

    Jake,

    I hope Storen is the guy. However, AA and the AFL is not MLB. Lets see how he does in AA closer and setup relief MLB until July. He only had a half season in the minors last year.

    Don’t push him into something high pressure he can’t do. You all saw what happened to Hanrahan last year. Sometimes great stuff doesn’t translate into the arrogant attitude needed for a closer.

  81. #81 by Jeff E. - December 19th, 2009 at 16:28

    somebody who pitches in COLO learns something new in pitching. Marquis. yes. still not sold on Garland. lets kick the tires on Washburn or Bedard.

  82. #82 by JayB - December 19th, 2009 at 18:55

    Bedard….not a chance….Bowden would do it…Rizzo never, ever, ever…..kid is one of the worst cancers in baseball.Lopez like….Stop trying to save a few million dollars…those days are long gone…Robert Fick, Nook Logan…the Lerners had their years of free cash flow, they most win or face fact that they are Bob Short.

  83. #83 by Guy Holly - December 20th, 2009 at 00:27

    Geez JayB could you just be positive once (for a Chtristmas present). Just once is all we ask. Just once!

  84. #84 by Jeff E. - December 20th, 2009 at 08:36

    lets hope that Capps passes on pitching in Chicago. I would imagine that Doug Harris and Co. are not done with some more 6 year F/As. too bad Bob Short did not have Bronfman money from bootlegging earlier in the 20th century. LOL! Guy Holly- some people just need their guardian angels named Clarence…..

  85. #85 by JayB - December 20th, 2009 at 09:30

    If Nats are going to get Garland and Jason M they are going to have to do it with more years and more money than anyone else. Why? Because Lerners choose to put team on the field led by Nook and Fick and the rest while the Nats were the most efficient money making team in baseball. That money came from fans like me and I expect them to use it to improve the product NOW.

    Side note….recall Stan telling us in 2006 that this team is much closer than people think and that 2008 could be a big year? Well it is 2010 now and our top Hot Stove move is $3 a year for 2 years……What are you people defending anyway?

    Nationals now have to use some of the profit to OVER PAY for the past mistakes they made keeping Jimbo. So what…..just do….it is time now…..not Feb with O Perez again.

  86. #86 by JayB - December 20th, 2009 at 09:41

    Recall Barry S of the Post……2010 will be the year to judge Lerner and Stan for the MLB Product…..Barry was a Jimbo apologist( saying he was one of the smartest men in baseball)…..and….even the biggest apologists for this ownership group know that Fans have been screwed over by the incompetence of the Nats and it is time to use the Huge profits made in 2006, 2007, 2008 and to a lesser extent 2009 to over pay for MLB talent and put a .500 team on the field. THAT MEANS SIGN STARTING PITCHING, QUALITY PROVEN 200 inning guys…there is only 2 or 3 left.

  87. #87 by Guy Holly - December 20th, 2009 at 12:56

    JayB,

    I don’t think you were the one who paid 450 million for the Nats. You may have suffered with them for the cost of your tickets.

    If you are so angry about them, why not just stop going. I doubt if anybody would notice.

  88. #88 by JayB - December 20th, 2009 at 12:59

    Is that what we want to teach our children about the American way…..if something is wrong with something you care about…..just stop caring about it instead of fixing it……..

  89. #89 by Sue Dinem - December 20th, 2009 at 13:23

    Guy Holly :

    I don’t think you were the one who paid 450 million for the Nats. You may have suffered with them for the cost of your tickets.

    And actually, that’s not even true. When you buy season tickets, you’re paying to have the same seat for every game and, perhaps, for certain amenities (parking, food, access to special events, etc.) — There is no guarantee that the team will win.

    In fact, the first thing they teach you in Sports Marketing is that you cannot market the results on the field, you can only market the experience of going to the game. So unless you were treated poorly by the team employees, you got what you paid for.

    You have no more claim or cause to complain than any other “fan” of the Nationals. Being a season ticket holder only means you’ve agreed to attend more games. That’s it. And quite frankly, I agree that the Nationals can afford to lose your “devotion.”

  90. #90 by JayB - December 20th, 2009 at 13:41

    Well your right about one thing the Nationals and Lose do go together……but it does not have to be like this….that is the Point…Sign Garland and Jason M for 3 years and $25 Million Each. Sign Smoltz for one year and $4 Million. Missed the boat already on Middle infielders but they could have done that too and you win this year and next, block nobody and in a good place to trade vets with cash in 2011.

    OR you could do nothing until Feb and offer Livo and Perez minor league contracts and watch them decide to stay home instead of losing 100 games yet again…..What would a real fan want them to do Sue?

  91. #91 by Guy Holly - December 20th, 2009 at 14:18

    JayB,

    Everyone agrees that they should be trying to improve. It just does no good to b***h about the past. Its over, move on. Mike Rizzo is doing a pretty good job. Give him some time to do it or vote with your feet and not go. Since you didn’t put up some of that 450 million it the only choice you have.

  92. #92 by RD exposfan - December 20th, 2009 at 17:54

    Well said Guy

  93. #93 by JayB - December 20th, 2009 at 18:49

    I am not going to spit myself. I love baseball, MLB baseball and this is my team. I am not going to stop going, I am going to keep pointing out what could be in hopes that someday Lerner’s get tired of being the laughing stock of 30 teams. They would make far more money by spending some money….I hope they get it someday.

  94. #94 by Mark L - December 21st, 2009 at 12:17

    It’s already past 11 a.m. and there’s been no complaint of the day from Jay B yet.

  95. #95 by Sue Dinem - December 21st, 2009 at 12:47

    Aren’t most public libraries closed today?

  96. #96 by Brian Oliver - December 21st, 2009 at 12:50

    Can we please stop with the attacks on JayB?

    Thanks and happy holidays

  97. #97 by JD - December 21st, 2009 at 13:59

    I totally agree with Brian and hope this site gets back to what it is meant for…. the Nats and takes on their farm system/player personnel.

  98. #98 by exporam - December 21st, 2009 at 14:28

    Hmmm – Indians sign Saul Rivera…

  99. #99 by Flores Fan - December 21st, 2009 at 15:44

    Nats sign Jason Marquis according to Byron Kerr.

  100. #100 by Sue Dinem - December 21st, 2009 at 16:33

    Now both MASN and NY Daily News are reporting Nats have signed Jason Marquis. The latter has twatted that the deal is 2 years, $15M.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Comments are closed.