Things are a bit crazy at work so I have not been able to stay current with the posts. The first day of winter meetings saw an active Mike Rizzo
- The Nationals acquired RHRP Brian Bruney from the New York Yankees for a player to be named later. To male room on their 40-man, the Nationals unconditionally released RHRP Saul Rivera. The reports are the Nationals will use their first overall selection in the Rule 5 draft as the PTBNL. I’m not a huge fan of this move for a couple of reasons. First, why did they have to make the move right now? By acquiring Bruney now, they had to dump Rivera. But they still are going to have to drop someone else in order to participate in the R5 draft. Now there are certainly candidates but why would the Nationals want to have to dump two players from the 40-man now when they could have waited until after the R5 and only dropped one. It’s a nitpick but something I don’t quite understand. Second, I’m not sure how tremendous an acquisition Bruney actually is in comparison to rolling the dice on a R5 guy. I know some bring up the roster restrictions of a R5 pick (they have to stay on the 25-man for a full season … with injury caveats). But the financial coast is negligible ($50K for the full season; $25K if returned). While there really aren’t any guys that jump out at me from the R5 eligibles I’ve seen, I still wonder if Bruney is anything more than another arm for the pen (I’ve seen the closer discussions and I’m not sold)
- The Nationals reportedly have signed Ivan Rodriguez to a two-year $6M deal. I like the idea of Pudge as a backup/mentor but I’m not as enamored with the two-year deal. Pudge made $1.5M split between the Astros and Rangers in 2009. Not sure I see the need to go with twice the term and quadruple the pay.
It’s nice to see Rizzo and the Nationals active … let’s hope there are a couple of SPs on the agenda.
#1 by estuartj - December 8th, 2009 at 09:50
Aren’t we usually complaining that the Lerner’s are cheap? Now Rizzo has convinced them to overspend and we’re complaining about that?
I think Rizzo wanted Pudge, more as coach/mentor than catcher (but he does provide insurance and stability) and was willing to pay Pudge what is took to get him in the fold.
2 years isn’t that big a deal if you don’t expect Norris or Harper to be ready by 2011, and I don’t expect either to be MLB ready OR catchers when they make the bigs…
#2 by Brian Oliver - December 8th, 2009 at 09:57
estuartj – I understand but I wonder what the reaction would have been if Bowden had made the same deal.
The picture cannot be adequately assessed until we see everything they do. If Pudge ends up being one of the biggest signings (in terms of impact and/or dollars) then I’ll be more critical. If he is only part of series of impact moves then I would reassess
#3 by JD - December 8th, 2009 at 09:58
I don’t think exposing another player to the R5 is that big a deal. If we are smart we can release Nieves now and not formalize the signing of Rodriguez until after the R5.
As for Rodriguez, I think it is important to get a good veteran catcher (and pitcher) to help our staff. Realistically how much did we overpay per year — $500k?? Bad teams must overpay in free agency and that is what we are right now.
#4 by Todd Boss - December 8th, 2009 at 10:02
I still see room for guys to get dropped from the 40-man honestly. I think Olsen, MacDougal and Nieves all could be non-tendered.
I’d rather go with a known quantity (Bruney) than a rule5 experiment at this stage of the Nationals development. And its exactly the opposite of the Yankees are thinking. How many guys did we have last year that could hump it up like him? He could be the perfect stopgap 8th inning guy/closer type until Storen is ready.
Skipping the rule5 draft could be another sign of the Rizzo mentality versus the Bowden mentality. Bowden was always a fan of the wild card, the diamond in the rough. Rizzo seems to want the known quantity, the established player.
#5 by JD - December 8th, 2009 at 10:03
Actually, my math was wrong on the overpay amount, but the point is the same.
#6 by estuartj - December 8th, 2009 at 10:06
Brian, I for sure agree on the big signing issue, I’m viewing this as more a coaching move than player aquisition.
We had 6 holes to fill 2SP, 2RP, 1MI & 1CA. Now we have 4, but none of this changes the dynamic for who those 2SP need to be, and that is where this off-season is going to be won or lost.
#7 by markfd - December 8th, 2009 at 10:13
I think Riz feels comfortable with a guy he knows, Bruney, versus the misadventures often found in the R5 draft: Terrell Young and Levale Speigner versus finding another Flores. My guess is th Yanks would not have done the deal without the Nats 1st R5 pick and Bruney was rumored to go elsewhere in the NL East during the Winter Meetings so Riz pulled the trigger…good deal and Pudge is even a greater deal…if we get a middle infielder and a starter without shipping out Willingham…mission accomplished!
#8 by catocony - December 8th, 2009 at 10:16
Will Nieves should be released and then signed to a minor-league deal with an invite to spring training. That’s the best he’ll get anywhere else, and he’s good insurance in case Flores needs to start the year on the DL or later on in the year. A good, solid major-league-ready veteran backup catcher at AAA is a necessity, not a luxury.
#9 by John O’Connor - December 8th, 2009 at 10:26
I agree with JD in that the laast thing I’m worried about is the Lerners overpaying for a free agent. The Nats HAVE to overpay because nobody wants to come here. And the Lerners have been pocketing lots of dough since they bought the team so they have it to spend.
What I don’t want to hear is they can’t get Jon Garland because of how much money they committed to Pudge Rodriguez.
#10 by Steve - December 8th, 2009 at 10:46
I like the signing of Pudge and I can understand the overpayment but for 2 years? Who were the Nats biding against? As for Burney he looks like a slight improvement but almost anyone with an ERA under 5 does on this team. I will give Rizzo credit for addressing the huge needs of the team something Bowden did not always do, although I wish all his players did not come from the Diamondbacks.
#11 by ckstevenson - December 8th, 2009 at 11:07
Consider this, in part, a good will signing. Now that we have Pudge, it makes us just a bit more approachable for a mid-level quality starter. They can now feel somewhat confident that if they come to DC, they’ll have a smart catcher who knows how to call pitches on their side. If Flores is starting the majority of the games, then the potential pitchers can feel like Pudge is there to bend Flores’ ear to guide him and give him advice.
And we very well may be in a position as a stinkwad team where we have to overpay to get some veterans to come here, and we just showed a willingness to do so (compared to Lo Duca, this is minor in overpayment, which was 1 year $5m).
#12 by Pilchard - December 8th, 2009 at 13:29
IRod is in major fade mode (career worst OPS of .663 in 2009), which is hardly a surprise given that he is 38 and has caught more games than anyone in MLB history. That said, he still threw out 35% of baserunners attempting to steal in 2009, and was better offensively and defensively than either Bard or Nieves last year.
Would think that the Nats could have waited this out, and gotten I-Rod with a 1 year deal with an option that would have kicked-in had IRod hit some performance milestones. Even so, a reasonably good deal.
Agree with the sentiment stated above that the Nats better not use this deal as an excuse as to why the Nats do not sign a starting pitcher over the next few months.
Not jazzed for Bruney, but generally AL pitchers have more success when the jump to the NL; so, hope/think that his numbers will improve. However, I would rather see the Nats try to hit a homerun with a Rule V player even if the %’s are not in the Nats favor than to deal for a mediocre MLB pitcher that is very unlikely to be a major difference-maker. Will be fun to compare how the top Rule V draft picks do as compared to Bruney from this point forward.
#13 by Facekdr - December 8th, 2009 at 13:55
I agree that I am not necessarily sold on the specifics, but I am happy to see the Nats active. I will hold judgement on this offseason until Rizzo is done dealing.
#14 by TimDz - December 8th, 2009 at 16:12
This is an interesting move, if for no other reason that the team doubled the years and $$$ of his previous contract. I figured that the Nats will have to overpay for a while (based on their recent history of ineptitude), but this seems a bit extreme. Is the FO worried about Flores’ health? I think nonetheless Pudge will have a good effect on both the pitching staff and Flores. I am also hoping this signing was made in an attempt to show some of the free agent pitchers out there that the team has at least some hope of competing (which is a stretch to consider)
#15 by dd - December 8th, 2009 at 17:14
“The Nationals’ pending agreement with free-agent catcher Ivan Rodriguez on a two-year, $6 million contract immediately prompted questions within the industry.
One rival general manager called the signing “odd,” noting that Rodriguez’s blocking and catching have declined and that his game-calling is just average.
In other words, he does not figure to be a strong mentor for the Nationals’ young pitching staff, which at this some point next season figures to include right-hander Stephen Strasburg.
Rodriguez, 38, also had just a .280 on-base percentage for the Astros last season, but the Nats believe that he wore down playing in 121 games. They plan to use him in only 70, and Rodriguez, they said, wants a reduced role.
Jesus Flores remains the Nationals’ No. 1 catcher — he is represented by Scott Boras, the same agent as Rodriguez. Derek Norris, a top catching prospect, is two years away, club officials say.
Some rival executives believe the Nats instead should have signed a pure backup such as Henry Blanco or Mike Redmond to a one-year deal rather than Rodriguez for two years.
The Nats say they gave Rodriguez a two-year deal to separate themselves from the other bidders.” — Ken Rosenthal
#16 by Jane - December 8th, 2009 at 18:21
Saul Rivera – you will be missed!!!!!!!
#17 by joNAThan - December 8th, 2009 at 19:03
Phil Wood’s blog on MASN mentions a conversation with Jack McKeon that sings the praises of IRod. The key will be Jesus’ health, but all in all there is no harm in having IRod around and if he really diminishes this year, the Nats have eaten more than $3 million before (Young, LoDuca, etc.) so no big deal.
Garland or Padilla? Any preferences?
#18 by Facekdr - December 8th, 2009 at 19:04
what do you know about Jerry Owens?
#19 by joNAThan - December 8th, 2009 at 19:13
Terrell’s cousin? No idea….probably a journeymen, but hey, Willie Harris was once a journeymen, now he’s Willie Harris.
#20 by Andrew Stebbins - December 8th, 2009 at 20:11
“Garland or Padilla? Any preferences?”
None of the above.
Wolf, Smoltz, Harden, Duchscherer (whom I’ve been told they don’t have interest in), Bedard, Piniero, Sheets, Washburn.
#21 by Emmett Aldredge - December 8th, 2009 at 22:17
I think signing Pudge is a nice move. As a backup to Flores, he’s certainly an upgrade over Bard and Nieves. If Flores isn’t ready or able to stay healthy, he’s still a better fallback than what we had. Did we overpay? Sure…too many years…sure. But $3M / year isn’t, or shouldn’t at least, be material to the team making other necessary moves. I’m actually excited the team would overpay to fix the problem – especially since its not the kind of money in the big picture that really ties the franchise’s hands in any significant way. Plus the credibility of a guy of his stature can’t hurt in luring other FA’s.
Time to turn to pitching and spend some real money.
#22 by Brian H - December 8th, 2009 at 22:33
Thank you, Andrew. Why does it seem we are only interested in lg avg or below production from the SPs on this roster – and for that matter, on the FA market. I feel like we’re really missing out on an opportunity to acquire effective SPs (a la Sheets, Duchscherer, Harden) at a massive discount , along with the opportunity to possibly game the system into acquiring a draft pick or two when these guys become FAs after a 1-2 yr deal. Is the price difference between these two classes really that prohibitive?
#23 by dd - December 8th, 2009 at 22:39
Jerry Owens.. Is that the same player who was originally drafted by the Expos in the second round? If so, good minor league player with speed, no pop. The soon to be 29 year old is no more than a fifth outfielder. Wish him well!!
#24 by markfd - December 8th, 2009 at 22:44
Yes dd that Jerry Owens, he gives us a CF in AAA.
#25 by Andrew Stebbins - December 9th, 2009 at 10:44
To go along with Maxwell or Bernadina.
#26 by Berndaddy - December 9th, 2009 at 11:19
Andrew one word — inventory !!!
Urgh….
#27 by SpringfieldFan - December 9th, 2009 at 12:35
Did y’all get the email holiday card from the Nats? I found it Interesting that they used a Maxwell walk-off as the video clip.
#28 by Offense/offensive - December 9th, 2009 at 12:45
What about Aroldis Chapman (the Cuban lefty)? It seems like the market for Chapman has come down quite a bit from the original $50-$60mil people thought he might get to more like $20-$30mil. Just think about a rotation including SS and Chapman…Extremely high potential there.
#29 by Paul - December 9th, 2009 at 12:58
Thinking big. I like that.
#30 by Sue Dinem - December 10th, 2009 at 09:33
For those interested, BA will be “tweeting” the R5 this morning:
#31 by Bill Wagner - December 13th, 2009 at 10:36
This is a symptom of a sea change in philosophy. Rizzo as someone said wants PROVEN players who are mature. The Nats will focus on college talent under Rizzo and major league talent. Under Bowden it was always about the moonshot chance – the “tools” guys who otherwise either had problems or hadn’t put it together. What has that gotten us? Disaster. Take a look at Oakland. Rizzo is doing it exactly like Beane does. Bowden left us with a bunch of very young talented guys who have yet to achieve their potential. Whether it be Smoker, or McGeary, or Marrero, or Smiley, or Destin Hood, or Gonzalez, or Burgess, or pick your poison. Glad to see a good philosophy now…