Taking a break from school stuff to play catch up on the minor league signings:
- From Baseball America … the Nats signed 2B Chase Lambin, SS Pedro Lopez, and OF Pedro Powell
- Lambin played for seven seasons in the Marlins and Mets organizations before heading to Japan last year. The 30-year old switch hitter seems destined for Syracuse if he sticks with the Nats
- I’m guessing that’s the Lopez they signed; the 23-year old appears to have been out of baseball for a couple of years. Guess Harrisburg if he hangs around
- Powell looks like a 4th/5th OF for Syracuse
- From the Nats transaction page, they have signed OF Chris Duncan to a minor league deal with a spring invitation. The 28-year old Duncan had two big power years for the Cardinals. He has recently battled a neck injury. I kind of like this signing. If he’s recovered, Duncan overs a powerful left-handed bat off the bench for the Nats, not seen since Daryle Ward.
- Ken Rosenthal is reporting that the Nationals have also signed RHRP Tyler Walker and LHSP Chuck James. It appears that Walker may be a major league deal while James is a minor league deal (assuming with a spring invitation). Walker is another right-handed option for the bullpen. If it is a major league deal, a corresponding roster move is needed. James is rehabbing from reconstructive shoulder surgery that cost him all of the 2009 season. This seems to be a Roy Clark move and is a low downside gamble for the back end of the Nationals rotation.
- The Nationals have updated their spring invites, including LHRP Victor Garate (who was removed from the 40-man for Matt Capps). Also added were RHRP Drew Storen and CA Derek Norris. Both are unlikely to break camp on the 25-man roster but given their prospect status, they will join RHSP Stephen Strasburg (on the 40-man) in spring camp. Honestly, it’s nice to see a smaller spring invite list for the Nats. Recently, there were far too many people invited to the major league camp
Big Board should be updated
#1 by Sue Dinem - January 25th, 2010 at 20:56
Powell has struggled @ AA and has zero power (his actuals are more like 5′5″ and 130). I’d bet good money his lone HR in pro ball was inside the park. He’s a Boomer Whiting-type player, with a weaker arm and slightly less speed, albeit a better fielder. I’d peg him for A+ as a stopgap until Chris Curran learns to hit, presuming Whiting is socially promoted to AA.
#2 by Jane - January 26th, 2010 at 04:40
Drew Storen, much continued success!
#3 by Toast - January 26th, 2010 at 09:32
Interesting sign with Chase Lambin, he was playing for Davey Johnson in Japan. Sounded like he was a hard worker and could/would play anywhere asked. Has an interesting blog about playing in Japan.
#4 by Toast - January 26th, 2010 at 09:35
Sorry for the mistake. He played for Bobby Valentine. Website http://www.chaselambin.com
#5 by VladiHondo - January 26th, 2010 at 10:11
I’m with you on the less invited the more better camp. Especially pitching wise, it’s hard to give somebody a proper look-see if you have to give innings to 12 starting pitching candidates. That was probably a factor in horrendous bullpen last year, we made totally the wrong choices.
#6 by jeff e. - January 26th, 2010 at 10:14
Steven King on the suspended list. Steve Souza not ready for a bump up to POT? Does this mean org. goes with MIF @ 3b @ HARR/POT unless scouts find several true 3b? March usually is a time for adding a few middle chain farmhands anyway. any thoughts anyone?
#7 by Pilchard - January 26th, 2010 at 11:30
Chuck James was the #7 prospect in the Braves organization in 2006 (#98 overall according to BA), and was the voted the best pitcher in the South Atlantic League in 2005. He jumped to the majors really quickly appearing in the Majors in his first year of pro ball.
In 2007, James made 30 starts for the Braves and was solid 11-10 4.24 ERA. He has been hurt the last couple of years, but not that long ago, he was considered one of the better pitching prospects in baseball.
Tyler Walker was effective for the Phils last year in 32 appearances: 2-1 3.06 ERA 1.13 WHIP 27/9 K/BB ratio. He was the closer for part of the 2008 season with Giants with 19 saves.
Two solid pick-ups IMO.
#8 by Louis J - January 26th, 2010 at 12:14
Any ideas why Jon Garland has not signed with anyone? Is it salary demands? If so what is he asking for? Has he lost his stuff? Is it a bad arm? Surely he should be worth 2yrs-$15/$16M or 1yr-$7.5M. Nats could use him as a #1/#2. Garland, Lannan & Marquis would be an improvement in the rotation.
#9 by markfd - January 26th, 2010 at 14:02
Brian, I agree with you, the Duncan pickup couold be a good one from a PH standpoint at least. I like another veteran in the pen with the Walker signing. The rest I hope are simply minor league roster fillers.
Also, congrats to Drew Storen and Derek Norris for getting to experience big league camp…another reason for me to be excited for my upcoming trip to Viera!
#10 by exporam - January 26th, 2010 at 14:23
Duncan at a minor league deal sure beats paying for Jacobs just to be a LH PH option.
Agreed on Chuck James Pilchard – no risk, potential nice reward.
Walker signing is nice – Bruney, Capps, Walker, Burnett, Clippard, Guardado, Storen, all of our long relief/#6 SP – not bad on paper.
Garland would be nice – not sure how the Sheets $8 million+ deal affects his demands other than there is one fewer arm out there now.
#11 by Louis J - January 26th, 2010 at 17:42
If the Nats are not interested in Garland, are they still trying to trade for Ricky Nolasco of Marlins. Nolasco only signed a 1yr contract and has one year left of arbitration before declaring free agency.
#12 by Pilchard - January 26th, 2010 at 18:29
Padres signed Garland today.
#13 by Paul - January 26th, 2010 at 18:49
Ronnie Belliard signed today for $850k. Considering that, any guesses on what it will take to sign Orlando “O-dog” Hudson? Two years at $9mil seems like too much considering the clear market signals that second basemen simply aren’t worth that much.
I think that the nats have to overpay, but still get their man. 1 year at $5mil or 2 at $8mil.
#14 by Jeff E. - January 26th, 2010 at 19:23
Paul, somebody wrote that SF set the IF market with Juan Uribe’s one year. Lets stand pat and go with what is on McCatty’s mentors. Lannon, Marquis, Olson and etc and go get O-dog or OC. Brian, did anybody sign the minor league F/A 3b who played 09 @ Hi-A?
#15 by Louis J. - January 27th, 2010 at 09:48
Sorry to hear Garland signing w/Padres. The Nats starting rotation is still not substantially better than 2009 even with Marquis!! Its Lannan (not a top of rotation SP). Marquis, ???, ????. ?????. An improved bullpen will not help with the first 6 innings of a game.
#16 by Louis J. - January 27th, 2010 at 10:02
The interest in Hudson & Cabrera is very confusing. Hudson & Cabrera may be a good defensive 2B; BUT, if they keep Guzman, he bats #2 in the lineup…and so does Hudson & Cabrera. None of the 3 has been successful batting lower (#6/#7) in the lineup. So why get Hudson/Cabrera? Adam Kennedy can play 2B, he’s LHH and can bat #7 in the lineup (61 RBI) following Dunn, Willingham & Dukes & in front of Flores-Rodriguez and costs a lot less. He can also move up to the #2 spot if needed. He’s BA-OBP-SLG are as good as Hudson/Cabrera.
#17 by Louis J. - January 27th, 2010 at 10:14
I just saw the contract Garland signed w/Padres…..$4.75 1yr w/$6.25 option yr and small buyout provision. The Padres are no winning team/franchise. My God…the Nats could not match or better this offer !!?? What the heck are they thinking that they could not afford a 1yr $4.75 contract for a veteran SP but can afford 2yr/$15M for Marquis ???? Is Marquis that much better than Garland ????
#18 by Andrew Z. Stebbins - January 27th, 2010 at 11:05
Louis, I think the rotation will shape up to be OK.
You’ll have Lannan, Marquis, Detwiler, Strasburg and probably Olsen. That leaves a few guys with major league experience, like Stammen, Balester, Martin and Estrada in AAA. Then you have prospects like Thompson and Meyers both probably starting in AA again.
Also, w/r/t to Hudson and Guzman in the lineup…slot Hudson second, Guzman 7th. If he doesn’t hit…don’t play him.
#19 by Chris - January 27th, 2010 at 11:21
Dude, relax. Rizzo has a plan and Jon Garland was never a part of it.
#20 by e - January 27th, 2010 at 11:34
Also, Garland had stated pretty early on that he preferred to pitch on the West Coast. I don’t think it would have mattered how much the Nats offered, Garland wasn’t going to pitch east of the Mississippi.
#21 by Matt - January 27th, 2010 at 11:35
Louis -
Fox Sports reported that the Nats offered Garland a contract similar to the Marquis deal (2 years/15 mil) but he just didn’t want to play for the Nats. Garland said from the beginning that he wanted to play on the west coast, so if he wants to flush $10 mil down the drain, so be it. Hopefully we use that money to lock up Hudson and possibly Smoltz. He can jump on the “mentoring the youngsters” train and then we can trade him to a contender mid-season.
#22 by Louis J - January 27th, 2010 at 11:39
Chris
Relax by ???. I’m part of a season ticket group that spends over $65K in tickets. If they can’t bring in better players, this group will disappear next year and being purchasing Caps or Orioles Season Tickets…Regardless of the GM, the Nats reminder us of Abe Polin and the Bullets.
#23 by Louis J - January 27th, 2010 at 11:39
Dude…Being should begin!!!
#24 by Chris - January 27th, 2010 at 11:55
I appreciate your financial commitment to the Nats – as do the Lerners – I’m sure. But If not signing Jon Garland forces you to give up your season tickets and become an Orioles fan – then become an Orioles fan. You weren’t much of a Nats fan to begin with if a switch like that is even a consideration.
Rizzo has completely retooled the bullpen and added Marquis and Pudge. Plus, like I said, he WILL add another veteran SP. Yet people still complain. I don’t get it. Rome wasn’t built in a day – neither are baseball teams.
And please, do me a favor, stay away from my Caps. The last thing I need are more ignorant, bandwagon hockey fans at Verizon.
#25 by Pilchard - January 27th, 2010 at 12:08
While I want the Nats to be aggressive in player acquisition and as a season ticket holder am eager to have a competitive team, I don’t Jon Garland as the type of player to make a big difference with this team.
Also, as stated above, Garland is from California and wants to stay on the West Coast. Unless the Nats are going to move, they can’t do much about that.
#26 by Louis J - January 27th, 2010 at 12:12
Chris
Mission accomplished….A small group of us are fed up with the BS and are in the process of selling our Nats season tickets. This will be my last posting. Have a good year. By the way , we were Caps season ticket holders from about 1975-1988 when they were lousy. We prefer golf in the summer and hockey in the fall. Also, I may be ignorant but I’m not a fool.
#27 by Chris - January 27th, 2010 at 12:15
So now you’re selling your Nats tickets because of me? Right.
#28 by Ryan Sullivan - January 27th, 2010 at 12:38
Got to love old school Cap fans… they get pissed if anyone becomes a fan now because they are bandwagon, but then turn around and complain because the Caps get so little coverage in newspapers and tv around town and claim lack of respect for hockey… talk about have your cake and eat it too-
Enjoy the new fans and the coverage and relax about being there when they stunk. No one cares about that but you… oh and Rock the Red!
#29 by Chris - January 27th, 2010 at 12:47
I love new fans genuinely interested in learning about hockey. I really do. But I hate fans that attend games simply because their law firm has unused client tickets. Inevitably, they spend the entire game hacking away on their iPhones/Blackberrys – paying absolutely zero attention to what’s happening on the ice. Drives me nuts.
#30 by Ryan Sullivan - January 27th, 2010 at 13:05
Fair point Chris, there is a drastic difference between the 2… Lets Go Caps!
Also, anyone going to any of the Nats Caravan events? Would be nice to put some names with faces from this board-
#31 by Pilchard - January 27th, 2010 at 14:01
Keith Law, who has never been easy on the Nats, released his 2010 organizational rankings today, and has the Nats at #23 (which I believe is up from last year). Law says that many of the key guys from the 2006 to 2008 drafts have not developed, but the Nats are “getting there”.
The top 3 are:
The Orioles are up to #6, and the Chicago White Sox are last. For those with ESPN insider access the link is here: http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/insider/columns/story?columnist=law_keith&id=4861174
#32 by jeff e. - January 27th, 2010 at 14:28
Better to be cautious than end up with a contract which could be an albatross @ trade deadline. Quoting the WHO in July- the kids are alright….then the decisions not to sign “so and so” or “so and so” in winter are redundant. I would rather see 4 million placed in the draft coffers than sign some arm who gets outpitched by a kid on the 40man.
#33 by Sue Dinem - January 27th, 2010 at 15:34
It’s always amusing to see the childlike grasp of the concept of free agency, not to mention the English language.
#34 by BinM - January 27th, 2010 at 20:27
Been a while since Brian had a chance to give us new ground to cover (welcome back, BTW), so here I go… Like the Duncan & James signings; Duncan is a good ‘insurance policy’ @SYR, and James is a ‘no-risk’ signing, but will probably need to go to HAR (or lower) to get some arm strength back. The Walker signing looks ok on paper, but I wonder if he’s Kip Wells redux; Hope I’m wrong, as he’ll cost the team a DFA/outright due to the ML contract.
For the most recent signings (via BA), they look like system guys to me.
#35 by BinM - January 27th, 2010 at 21:06
Brian: Not that it matters, but on the ‘Big Board” – CA J.Bard (Signed by SEAm), SS F. Bynum (signed by DETm), 1B M.Whitney (signed by OAKm), 3B K.Casto (signed by DETm), RF J.Padilla (signed by TORm), OF N.Hopper (signed by MILm), RF A.Kearns (signed by CLEm), P C.Everts (Signed by NYMm), RP S.Rivera (Signed by CLEm), RP Z.Segovia (signed by NYYm).
#36 by Jane - January 28th, 2010 at 08:01
Freddie Bynum was signed by the Chicago White Sox.
#37 by Mark L - January 28th, 2010 at 11:14
ESPN has our own Drew Storen on for a chat @ 1:30 today!
#38 by Dick - January 28th, 2010 at 12:46
In the ultimate irony of ironies, MLB ranks the top 50 prospects and has Drew Storen at #40 and Aaron Crow at #41.
#39 by Sue Dinem - January 28th, 2010 at 15:36
I’m surprised Crow ranked at all. Pretty amazing considering he’s faced 67 batters in his professional career.
#40 by Pilchard - January 28th, 2010 at 16:08
Baseball Prospectus just released their projected 2010 standings based on the each team’s current depth chart, and I am stunned:
Nats projected to finish 82-80; third in the NL East ahead of the Mets and Marlins. The link: http://baseballprospectus.com/fantasy/dc/
#41 by Brian Oliver - January 28th, 2010 at 17:31
I take that 82-80 with an enormous grain of salt
#42 by Pilchard - January 28th, 2010 at 17:47
Agree. BP has Tampa winning the AL East, the A’s the AL West and the Yanks missing the playoffs. Still, it nice to see the Nats projected to be a competitive team.
#43 by Sue Dinem - January 28th, 2010 at 18:04
The folks at Baseball HQ (formerly Deric McKamey; now Rob Gordon & Jeremy Deloney) have ranked the Washington farm system 17th. Last year, they were 25th. The top dog is Cleveland (#6 last year), the Alpo is Houston (#29). Baltimore is ranked #8 (5), Boston #9 (7) , and the Yankees are 16th for the 2nd year in a row.
I’ll be posting thoughts and more tidbits on the other site to which I contribute (link in name) shortly.
#44 by e - January 28th, 2010 at 18:14
what’s really funny about the BP projected standings is that it looks like it’s based on the Nats pitching and defense. I don’t have a BP subscription so I’m just looking at the overall standings and they project the Nats to be tied for 3rd in the NL with the fewest runs allowed but to be 12th in the NL in scoring runs.
I’d like to be as positive as I can, but even I think that is a tad ridiculous.
#45 by Sue Dinem - January 29th, 2010 at 09:47
The CAIROs are in, and the projections here are a wee bit more realistic:
http://rlyw.blogspot.com/2010/01/extremely-early-2010-mlb-projected.html
70-75 wins seems about right; last year’s team should have won about about 60-65 and I think a 10-game improvement is nearly a given just from an improved bullpen.