Nats Triple Play
3 Idiots on Baseball and Life in Washington, DC
Updated: 2 min 31 sec ago
Doing Arbitration Right
Maybe the Nats are a little arb happy. Maybe the Lerners are cheap. Maybe Stan Kasten's stubborn, or maybe Mike Rizzo has an ego the size of Livan Hernandez. I don't know... and neither do you. Here's what I know: just because you decide to take a player to arbitration doesn't mean you have to trash him. From Nationals Journal:
According to Bruney, Washington argued for the lesser of those salaries by emphasizing the relief pitcher's recent injury history.
It's easy to see how disagreements about a pitcher's talent and results can get heated and leave hard feelings. It's harder to see how a player can get very upset about the observation that he just hasn't been 100% for the last few years.
Rizzo: You've been banged up.
Bruney: Have not.
Rizzo: Have too.
Bruney: It's just a flesh wound.
In any case, Bruney said he trusted the market to tell him what he's worth, and the market has spoken.
According to Bruney, Washington argued for the lesser of those salaries by emphasizing the relief pitcher's recent injury history.
It's easy to see how disagreements about a pitcher's talent and results can get heated and leave hard feelings. It's harder to see how a player can get very upset about the observation that he just hasn't been 100% for the last few years.
Rizzo: You've been banged up.
Bruney: Have not.
Rizzo: Have too.
Bruney: It's just a flesh wound.
In any case, Bruney said he trusted the market to tell him what he's worth, and the market has spoken.
The Unthinkable
Felipe Lopez is still out there. The best free agent second baseman available is still looking for work. The guy who put up a .310/.383!/.427 line in Arizona and Milwaukee last year, with better defense than Orlando Hudson, isn't going to Spring Training without buying a ticket. He's just axed Scott Boras too, probably in reaction to being unemployed longer than Adam Everett, Kelly Johnson, Alex Gonzalez, Melvin Mora and Adam Kennedy.
I don't like Felipe Lopez. There's no doubt in my mind that he quit on the Nationals in 2007-08. He dogged it, phoned it in, went through the motions, whatever you want to call it. I doubt you'll find a single Nats fan willing to come to FLop's defense. He was playing out of position, on a terrible team, and all evidence suggests that he was a bad seed, on the field and off. But that was then, and baseball makes strange bedfellows.
Mike Rizzo's stated goal for the offseason was to improve the infield defense. Maybe he did that with the Adam Kennedy signing. Personally, I'm not convinced that a 34 year-old 2B coming off his first good offensive season since 2005, (and his worst defensive season ever) is the answer to the Nats infield woes. If Kennedy were bumped to the bench, he'd be an upgrade over Alberto Gonzalez or Eric Bruntlett, and at $1.25M he'd still be making less than Ronnie Belliard was paid to do the same job last season.
Of course, all this is idle blogger chatter. The Nats have expressed no interest in Lopez, and he's certainly given no sign that he's inclined to come back. However, this is a very different team since Felipe left in 2008. New GM, new manager and a boatload of new players. And Spring Training is just around the corner.
Maybe the reason he's still looking for work is that he really is a clubhouse cancer even when he's playing well for a contender. If that's the case then the Nats are justified in staying well away. But if Rizzo is serious about constantly looking for was to improve the club, this is one stone he really shouldn't leave unturned.
I don't like Felipe Lopez. There's no doubt in my mind that he quit on the Nationals in 2007-08. He dogged it, phoned it in, went through the motions, whatever you want to call it. I doubt you'll find a single Nats fan willing to come to FLop's defense. He was playing out of position, on a terrible team, and all evidence suggests that he was a bad seed, on the field and off. But that was then, and baseball makes strange bedfellows.
Mike Rizzo's stated goal for the offseason was to improve the infield defense. Maybe he did that with the Adam Kennedy signing. Personally, I'm not convinced that a 34 year-old 2B coming off his first good offensive season since 2005, (and his worst defensive season ever) is the answer to the Nats infield woes. If Kennedy were bumped to the bench, he'd be an upgrade over Alberto Gonzalez or Eric Bruntlett, and at $1.25M he'd still be making less than Ronnie Belliard was paid to do the same job last season.
Of course, all this is idle blogger chatter. The Nats have expressed no interest in Lopez, and he's certainly given no sign that he's inclined to come back. However, this is a very different team since Felipe left in 2008. New GM, new manager and a boatload of new players. And Spring Training is just around the corner.
Maybe the reason he's still looking for work is that he really is a clubhouse cancer even when he's playing well for a contender. If that's the case then the Nats are justified in staying well away. But if Rizzo is serious about constantly looking for was to improve the club, this is one stone he really shouldn't leave unturned.
Everybody Wang Chung Tonight*
Now this is dumpster-diving we can believe in. Per the Boston Globe's Pete Abraham, (via MLBTradeRumors) SP Chien-Ming Wang is on the verge of agreeing to a contract with the Nats. If this is what Mike Rizzo did with the money he saved on Adam Kennedy, that's alright by me.
Wang comes with an host of question marks, but so does everyone else available at this point. He's coming off shoulder surgery, so there's no way he's ready to start the season (his agent says mid-May, which makes me think maybe June 1st.) Wang's only pitched 137 innings in the last two years, and his numbers last season were atrocious, so we probably aren't getting the 2006 Cy Young runner-up, two-time 19 game winner. Even what he does well could be a problem.
Wang's a groundball pitcher. It may even be fair to say that he's the groundball pitcher. To be successful he needs a good infield defense behind him. The Nats have never had a good infield defense, particularly up the middle. Improving that defense was one of Rizzo's stated goals for the offseason, but the projected 2010 Dunn-Kennedy-Guzman-Zimmerman infield is still a huge defensive question mark.
Nevertheless, it's a great low-risk pick-up for the Nats, a welcome respite from the Bowden impersonator that signed Miguel Batista (Basil's man-crush notwithstanding) and Shawn Estes. It's also a good sign that Rizzo isn't resigned to a 2010 rotation of Marquis-Lannan and a 3-game forfeit. Pitchers and catchers report in just over a week, so everybody have fun tonight!
*Yes, I know how it's pronounced, but if Wang is Wong I don't want to be right.
Send a Blogger to Camp
I've been remiss in failing to note the arrival of a distinguished new member of the Natmosphere. Mark Zuckerman is a familiar name to long-suffering Nats fans, as he's been covering the team for that other Washington daily paper for nigh unto five seasons. Of course, that other paper has decided to reinvent itself as a conservative Politico (redundant?) so Mark finds himself adrift among the basement dwellers.
In other words, Mark Z's got a brand new bag. A link to his NATS INSIDER blog (ohh... original) is off to the right. Of course, as a newly-minted freelancer Mark's got to pay his own freight, which is where we come in. In the interest of having someone other than Phil Wood, Rocket Bill Ladson and the Post's newest intern/mailroom clerk/Nats beat scribe reporting from Viera, Zuckerman is soliciting contributions to fund his vaca... coverage of Spring Training. This is what Bob Levey should have been doing all these years.
There's no question that this is a worthy cause. Not Haiti-worthy, certainly, but for a fan of the Nationals and intelligent baseball coverage, important. So give a few bucks in order that somebody with a BBWAA card can ask Riggleman why in God's name he wants to use Ian Desmond as a utility infielder. Click here to contribute.
Now, an editorial aside. Sending Mark Zuckerman to Viera is all fine and good. FJB can tell you why in breath-taking detail. Access is good. But even better is a willingness to ask the questions fans actually want answered without fear of losing that access. Maybe Mark the blogger will find himself more free to do that than Mark the Times reporter. I don't know. What I do know is that given the choice I'd rather raise money to send Chris Needham, Steven Biel and Brian Oliver to Space Coast Stadium. Stupid, pesky real jobs get in the way of all my best ideas.
In other words, Mark Z's got a brand new bag. A link to his NATS INSIDER blog (ohh... original) is off to the right. Of course, as a newly-minted freelancer Mark's got to pay his own freight, which is where we come in. In the interest of having someone other than Phil Wood, Rocket Bill Ladson and the Post's newest intern/mailroom clerk/Nats beat scribe reporting from Viera, Zuckerman is soliciting contributions to fund his vaca... coverage of Spring Training. This is what Bob Levey should have been doing all these years.
There's no question that this is a worthy cause. Not Haiti-worthy, certainly, but for a fan of the Nationals and intelligent baseball coverage, important. So give a few bucks in order that somebody with a BBWAA card can ask Riggleman why in God's name he wants to use Ian Desmond as a utility infielder. Click here to contribute.
Now, an editorial aside. Sending Mark Zuckerman to Viera is all fine and good. FJB can tell you why in breath-taking detail. Access is good. But even better is a willingness to ask the questions fans actually want answered without fear of losing that access. Maybe Mark the blogger will find himself more free to do that than Mark the Times reporter. I don't know. What I do know is that given the choice I'd rather raise money to send Chris Needham, Steven Biel and Brian Oliver to Space Coast Stadium. Stupid, pesky real jobs get in the way of all my best ideas.
Nats Eyeing Wang*
Mike Rizzo may not be officially "done" trying to add one more veteran arm to the 2010, but the search has clearly shifted from legitimate free agent upgrade (Jason Marquis) to the Nats old familiar haunt, Trader Jim's Bargain Bin and Retread Emporium, home of the likes of Miguel Batista and Chuck James. Quoth the Rizz, "There is nobody ... out there on the pitching market that is a difference maker." Which leads us to the newest item in the display case, ex-Yankee SP Chein-Ming Wang.
Wang is coming off back-to-back injury shortened seasons, and he's not expected to be ready to start the 2010 season. Add to that the fact that he's a ground ball pitcher on a team preparing to roll out Adam Dunn at 1B and a yet-to-be-determined middle infield (Orlando Hudson is not a defensive upgrade!!1!) and what we have here is an unstoppable recipe for success. Still, Rizzo is probably right. Wang is likely no worse than another rehab project like Eric Bedard or any of the cast of undistinguished fifth starters still available as free agents.
Trading for a starter would probably net a better player, but at the cost of opening up another hole in a still patchwork lineup. In the meantime, Rizzo just lost another potential fifth starter candidate when the Milwaukee Brewers claimed Marco Estrada off waivers. Hmmm... losing serviceable young starting prospects on waivers to clear roster space for fungible vets. Who does that remind you of?
*No, I'm not proud of that, but I'm not made of stone.
Wang is coming off back-to-back injury shortened seasons, and he's not expected to be ready to start the 2010 season. Add to that the fact that he's a ground ball pitcher on a team preparing to roll out Adam Dunn at 1B and a yet-to-be-determined middle infield (Orlando Hudson is not a defensive upgrade!!1!) and what we have here is an unstoppable recipe for success. Still, Rizzo is probably right. Wang is likely no worse than another rehab project like Eric Bedard or any of the cast of undistinguished fifth starters still available as free agents.
Trading for a starter would probably net a better player, but at the cost of opening up another hole in a still patchwork lineup. In the meantime, Rizzo just lost another potential fifth starter candidate when the Milwaukee Brewers claimed Marco Estrada off waivers. Hmmm... losing serviceable young starting prospects on waivers to clear roster space for fungible vets. Who does that remind you of?
*No, I'm not proud of that, but I'm not made of stone.
Any Orlando Will Do
The Washington Nationals came into the 2010 offseason with a legitimate hole in the roster at second base. Lucky for them, the 2010 free agent class featured an abundance of capable middle infielders. Mark DeRosa, Marco Scutaro, Orlando Hudson and Felipe Lopez (admittedly unlikely to sign on for a return engagement in DC) were among the "big" names, but there were more than a few glove-first types: Adam Everett, John McDonald and Alex Gonzalez for starters.
As you'd expect, the Nats were linked to a number of these guys. DeRosa and Everett were acknowledged targets before they signed elsewhere. Hudson has been a constant presence, and Adam Kennedy surfaced recently as an alternative. But nowhere in all of this chatter has anyone uttered the name Orlando Cabrera. Until yesterday.
Know why nobody talks about O-Cab anymore? Because he's done. He was once (and I mean that literally, one year) a good hitter for a shortstop, but any value in his bat was tied to his position. And he hasn't been a good shortstop for a long time. That's okay though, because the Nats plan to move him to second base!
Orlando Cabrera has appeared in over 1700 major league games. He's played second base 33 times, most recently a 3-inning stint in one game in the year 2000. This is not a case of guy dusting off the old mitt and getting back in the groove. This would be a 36-year old learning an entirely new position for a new team in two months. Cabrera's an athlete and I'm sure he wouldn't embarrass himself, but what exactly is the supposed upside to this move? A Guzman-Cabrera middle infield? Surely you jest.
Maybe it's just an Orlando thing. Orlando Hudson playing hard to get? Sign Orlando Cabrera. In that case, I present the NTP-approved list of Alternative Orlandos (in order of preference):
As you'd expect, the Nats were linked to a number of these guys. DeRosa and Everett were acknowledged targets before they signed elsewhere. Hudson has been a constant presence, and Adam Kennedy surfaced recently as an alternative. But nowhere in all of this chatter has anyone uttered the name Orlando Cabrera. Until yesterday.
Know why nobody talks about O-Cab anymore? Because he's done. He was once (and I mean that literally, one year) a good hitter for a shortstop, but any value in his bat was tied to his position. And he hasn't been a good shortstop for a long time. That's okay though, because the Nats plan to move him to second base!
Orlando Cabrera has appeared in over 1700 major league games. He's played second base 33 times, most recently a 3-inning stint in one game in the year 2000. This is not a case of guy dusting off the old mitt and getting back in the groove. This would be a 36-year old learning an entirely new position for a new team in two months. Cabrera's an athlete and I'm sure he wouldn't embarrass himself, but what exactly is the supposed upside to this move? A Guzman-Cabrera middle infield? Surely you jest.
Maybe it's just an Orlando thing. Orlando Hudson playing hard to get? Sign Orlando Cabrera. In that case, I present the NTP-approved list of Alternative Orlandos (in order of preference):
- Orlando Jones - he played a wide receiver in The Replacements, he could fake second base.
- Orlando Bloom - recently named UNICEF goodwill ambassador, could help with international scouting.
- Tony Orlando - he don't love you (like I love you).
- Orlando Cabrera - more upside.
- Or... Lando Calrissian - yes, it's a stretch. Yes, I'd still prefer Billy Dee to O-Cab.
Washington-on-Hudson
The Washington Nationals flirtation with 2B Orlando Hudson has none of the glacial majesty of the Mets pursuit of Bengie Molina, though if you consider that it arguably began more than a year ago it may qualify for the longest free agent courtship in MLB history. The quasi-public negotiations have hit all the classic marks:
Hudson's acquisition would push Guzman back to shortstop, where believe it or not he's basically an average defender when he's healthy, but a Guzman-Hudson-Dunn infield would leave newly-minted Gold Glover Ryan Zimmerman with a lot of ground to cover, and Nats fans should probably prepare themselves for a summer of bloops up the middle and bleeders into short right field. That said, that defensive infield could certainly be better than the Dunn-Guzman-Desmond alternative, and having Hudson on board would give Jim Riggleman and Mike Rizzo both security and flexibility.
As to the question of what sort of contract Hudson deserves, his reported demands aren't actually too far off his projected value. Orlando's consistently been worth 2-3 wins above replacement for the last 5 seasons and there's no particular reason to expect him to hit the wall in 2010. A $9M contract would pay between $3-4.5M per win, a fair value. Of course, Hudson's almost certainly not going to get $9M (certainly not from the Nats), even in a heavily incentivized deal, so it's fair to expect some value from whatever offer he does accept.
The rumored second year? Guzman is likely gone when his contract is up. (*sob*) The organization's middle infield talent pipeline is pretty well empty until you get to Danny Espinosa and Jeff Kobernus in the low minors, well... someone's got to play second in 2011. Like the second year of the Jason Marquis deal, who exactly would the O-Dawg be blocking?
- Nats suggest that their obvious second base vacancy could be filled by Cristian Guzman;
- Hudson expresses guarded interest;
- A 2-year offer at a "reasonable" rate is rumored;
- Ridiculously inflated salary demands ($9M/yr) are leaked by one side or the other;
- Nats respond, "Hey, look over there at Adam Kennedy!";
- Tony Plush escalates his O-Dawg lobbying campaign;
- Mutual interest is reiterated and deadlines are hinted at.
Hudson's acquisition would push Guzman back to shortstop, where believe it or not he's basically an average defender when he's healthy, but a Guzman-Hudson-Dunn infield would leave newly-minted Gold Glover Ryan Zimmerman with a lot of ground to cover, and Nats fans should probably prepare themselves for a summer of bloops up the middle and bleeders into short right field. That said, that defensive infield could certainly be better than the Dunn-Guzman-Desmond alternative, and having Hudson on board would give Jim Riggleman and Mike Rizzo both security and flexibility.
As to the question of what sort of contract Hudson deserves, his reported demands aren't actually too far off his projected value. Orlando's consistently been worth 2-3 wins above replacement for the last 5 seasons and there's no particular reason to expect him to hit the wall in 2010. A $9M contract would pay between $3-4.5M per win, a fair value. Of course, Hudson's almost certainly not going to get $9M (certainly not from the Nats), even in a heavily incentivized deal, so it's fair to expect some value from whatever offer he does accept.
The rumored second year? Guzman is likely gone when his contract is up. (*sob*) The organization's middle infield talent pipeline is pretty well empty until you get to Danny Espinosa and Jeff Kobernus in the low minors, well... someone's got to play second in 2011. Like the second year of the Jason Marquis deal, who exactly would the O-Dawg be blocking?
DC Doesn't Need A(nother) Kennedy
As it stands Cristian Guzman is the 2010 Opening Day second baseman for your Washington Nationals. If they can't reel in Orlando Hudson (one year too late) to play second, Plan B appears to be infielder Adam Kennedy. I'm sure Adam's a swell fella, loves puppies and rainbows and all that, but no matter how you feel about Cristian Guzman, Adam Kennedy's got no business playing in D.C. in 2010.
Over at his cleverly moniker-ed Nationals Baseball blog Harper makes the case that Kennedy probably won't be so bad. A (slightly) better bat than Guzman, and a glove that appears to fluctuate wildly between above average and terrible. But is that really a combination you need to shell out free agent money for?
Cristian Guzman will occupy one middle infield postion, that's a given. With that in mind, there are two good reasons for the Nats to sign an infielder: to upgrade the offense or to upgrade the defense (or ideally both, but that doesn't look to be a realistic option.) Hudson would be an offensive plus, but a Hudson/Guzman defensive infield wouldn't do the pitching staff any favors. Kennedy might be a defensive improvement but carrying both his bat and Guzman's would be a real offensive hindrance.
On the excellent Fangraphs site Dave Cameron has a thoughtful article from a few months back about the relative merits of moving Guzman from shortstop to second. For the moment the Nats seem fixated on adding a second baseman, which would keep Guzman at short and Ian Desmond on the bench. There's nothing wrong with this plan, so long as it adds real value to the team rather than just shuffling deck chairs on the S.S. Natanic.
Over at his cleverly moniker-ed Nationals Baseball blog Harper makes the case that Kennedy probably won't be so bad. A (slightly) better bat than Guzman, and a glove that appears to fluctuate wildly between above average and terrible. But is that really a combination you need to shell out free agent money for?
Cristian Guzman will occupy one middle infield postion, that's a given. With that in mind, there are two good reasons for the Nats to sign an infielder: to upgrade the offense or to upgrade the defense (or ideally both, but that doesn't look to be a realistic option.) Hudson would be an offensive plus, but a Hudson/Guzman defensive infield wouldn't do the pitching staff any favors. Kennedy might be a defensive improvement but carrying both his bat and Guzman's would be a real offensive hindrance.
On the excellent Fangraphs site Dave Cameron has a thoughtful article from a few months back about the relative merits of moving Guzman from shortstop to second. For the moment the Nats seem fixated on adding a second baseman, which would keep Guzman at short and Ian Desmond on the bench. There's nothing wrong with this plan, so long as it adds real value to the team rather than just shuffling deck chairs on the S.S. Natanic.
Could Have? Yes. Should Have?...
Now that the details of Aroldis Chapman's $30M deal with the Cincinnati Reds are beginning to firm up, (h/t to MLBTradeRumors) we can say with some confidence that it's a contract the Washington Nationals could have matched. It's a five year major league deal with a sixth year player option, but the money is spread out over ten years and Chapman's 2010 salary is only $1M. Chapman's service time clock will start immediately.
In a vacuum, a $30M major league contract is a big commitment to a still relatively untested amateur free agent. However, given the structure of the deal (average annual value of $3M) it's hardly a crippling financial burden, even for a smaller market club like the Reds. Given that, and the deplorable state of the Nats pitching pipeline behind Stephen Strasburg, should the Nats have shelled out $30M for a Chapman lottery ticket?
Yes.
First, let's deal with the Strasburg comparisons. Stephen Strasburg is better than Aroldis Chapman. He is today and will be for the immediate future; there's no serious debate on this question. Chapman's value lies in projecting what he might do if and when he harnesses his considerable tools. The projections range from total bust through lights-out lefty closer all the way to staff ace, but they're just projections. So paying Chapman more (in total dollars) than Strasburg or anyone else on the team who didn't just win a Gold Glove could cause a perception problem both in the clubhouse and among the general public.
Still, $30M spread over ten years shouldn't hamstring a club like the Nationals, playing in a market like Washington, DC. There's a vast difference between bad contracts and crippling contracts. Nats fans are all too familiar with bad contracts (Guzman, Kearns, Young) but none of those contracts seriously impeded the team's ability to make other moves. Likewise if Chapman flames out or becomes a left-handed Fernando Rodney, Cincinnati's 10-year commitment would likely be seen as a bad deal, but not an albatross that would sink the franchise.
Perhaps more than any other team in baseball the Nats have the potential revenue and readily available roster space that could be combined in a creative deal like the Aroldis Chapman contract. Perhaps Mike Rizzo and the front office concluded that he just wasn't worth the joint financial and time commitment. Certainly the Yankees, Red Sox and Angels, who could have easily matched the Reds dollar for dollar, took a pass. The Nats have a bad track record of being shortchanged by Cincinnati GMs. Here's hoping it didn't just happen again.
In a vacuum, a $30M major league contract is a big commitment to a still relatively untested amateur free agent. However, given the structure of the deal (average annual value of $3M) it's hardly a crippling financial burden, even for a smaller market club like the Reds. Given that, and the deplorable state of the Nats pitching pipeline behind Stephen Strasburg, should the Nats have shelled out $30M for a Chapman lottery ticket?
Yes.
First, let's deal with the Strasburg comparisons. Stephen Strasburg is better than Aroldis Chapman. He is today and will be for the immediate future; there's no serious debate on this question. Chapman's value lies in projecting what he might do if and when he harnesses his considerable tools. The projections range from total bust through lights-out lefty closer all the way to staff ace, but they're just projections. So paying Chapman more (in total dollars) than Strasburg or anyone else on the team who didn't just win a Gold Glove could cause a perception problem both in the clubhouse and among the general public.
Still, $30M spread over ten years shouldn't hamstring a club like the Nationals, playing in a market like Washington, DC. There's a vast difference between bad contracts and crippling contracts. Nats fans are all too familiar with bad contracts (Guzman, Kearns, Young) but none of those contracts seriously impeded the team's ability to make other moves. Likewise if Chapman flames out or becomes a left-handed Fernando Rodney, Cincinnati's 10-year commitment would likely be seen as a bad deal, but not an albatross that would sink the franchise.
Perhaps more than any other team in baseball the Nats have the potential revenue and readily available roster space that could be combined in a creative deal like the Aroldis Chapman contract. Perhaps Mike Rizzo and the front office concluded that he just wasn't worth the joint financial and time commitment. Certainly the Yankees, Red Sox and Angels, who could have easily matched the Reds dollar for dollar, took a pass. The Nats have a bad track record of being shortchanged by Cincinnati GMs. Here's hoping it didn't just happen again.
Better Outrighted Than Garrotted, I Suppose
After quietly smuggling reliever Matt Capps into town earlier this week the Nats made a place for him on the 40-man roster by outrighting lefty reliever Victor Garate to AAA Syracuse. Garate (aka the PTBNL in the Ronnie Belliard trade) had an abysmal 2 inning big league audition at the tail end of 2009, posting a 22.50 ERA, 4.00 WHIP (19 ERA+), so his demotion is not particularly surprising. What is surprising, and more than a little depressing, is that Garate was not necessarily an automatic choice. You could make a case that a half dozen players currently tying up spots on the roster are less valuable than Capps, and Matt (a righty closer on the rebound) isn’t all that valuable himself.
Jesse English, Ryan Mattheus, Atahualpa Severino and Doug Slaten come almost immediately to mind. You could add Luis Atilano and Marco Estrada without much argument, and I’d even be willing to entertain a discussion about the relative value of Brian Bruney and Matt Chico. There’s a lot of dead weight on the Nats roster, but the problem is that these guys are here because they’re better than any of the other options – they are the best major league-ready talent in the organization.
Of course, Drew Storen will be along to claim a roster spot soon enough. Some of the Nats failed starters (Mock, Balester, Chico) might mature into effective relief arms. Every year one or two non-roster invitees impress or resurrect their careers. No doubt several more of the fungible relievers above will be joining Victor Garate in Syracuse or Harrisburg. Still, it’s a measure of how very far the Nats have to go that even after making moves to shore up the relief corp there’s this much chaff on the roster.
The wasted space on the roster makes the team’s reported interest in veteran outfielder Randy Winn all the more difficult to understand. Winn’s a wizard with the glove, but he brings next to nothing with the bat. Assuming he’s not displacing starters Josh Willingham, Nyjer Morgan and Elijah Dukes, or reserve Willie Harris (no slouch with the leather himself), Winn would be competing with Justin Maxwell, Roger Bernadina and Mike Morse for that all-important 5th outfielder spot. Sure a Harris-Morgan-Winn defensive outfield would be impressive, but would it really be worth the collective 260/330/370 batting line?
A Slow Sports News Day in DC?
New Redskins head something or other?
Wizards star point guard indefinitely something something?
Oh yeah, Nats officially introduce Matt Capps... remember him?
Timing may not be everything, but jeez... the team couldn't wait for Alex Ovechkin, Art Monk and John Thompson, Jr. to get in a 3-car pileup before scheduling this press conference? Capps is a signing Mike Rizzo can actually be proud of; if they wanted to smuggle someone in under cover of darkness they could have pushed back the Pudge Rodriguez presser.
That said, kudos to Nats media relations guru Mike Gazda for setting up a conference call between Capps and pasty, basement-dwelling internet scribes. Though NTP was not directly represented (the terms of our collective work release limit our access to unmonitored phone calls) the event is well-documented here, here, here and elsewhere across the Natmosphere.
Good on the team for allowing this kind of access to the unwashed masses, and good on Matt for enduring being the third (or fourth) biggest DC sports story of the day with evident good humor.
Wizards star point guard indefinitely something something?
Oh yeah, Nats officially introduce Matt Capps... remember him?
Timing may not be everything, but jeez... the team couldn't wait for Alex Ovechkin, Art Monk and John Thompson, Jr. to get in a 3-car pileup before scheduling this press conference? Capps is a signing Mike Rizzo can actually be proud of; if they wanted to smuggle someone in under cover of darkness they could have pushed back the Pudge Rodriguez presser.
That said, kudos to Nats media relations guru Mike Gazda for setting up a conference call between Capps and pasty, basement-dwelling internet scribes. Though NTP was not directly represented (the terms of our collective work release limit our access to unmonitored phone calls) the event is well-documented here, here, here and elsewhere across the Natmosphere.
Good on the team for allowing this kind of access to the unwashed masses, and good on Matt for enduring being the third (or fourth) biggest DC sports story of the day with evident good humor.
Rocket Bill's Burning Sensation
If it's January 1st, it must be time for the first of many inane and wildly premature 2010 season previews. Leading off, 10 Burning Questions with MLB.com Nats beat writer "Rocket" Bill Ladson. As a bonus, we've given this column our patented "Ask an Idiot Blogger" treatment.
1. Will the Nationals play at least .500 baseball this season?
Rocket sez: "Too soon to tell. Ask again later."
We say: That's some quality Magic 8-Ball. But to actually answer the question, yes the Nats will go 2-2 over a four game stretch at some point in 2010, thereby playing .500 baseball. Wait, what... you mean .500 baseball for the season? Are you high?
2. Who is going to be the starting catcher?
Rocket sez: "Ivan Rodriguez."
We say: Boo! Bring back Wiki Gonzalez!
3. Will Elijah Dukes be the regular right fielder?
Rocket sez: "It's now or never."
We say: Define "regular". Seriously though, who's your alternative? Justin Maxwell? Willie Harris? It's Dukes' job until somebody better comes along.
4. Will Ian Desmond become the Opening Day shortop?
Rocket sez: "Answer unclear. Ask again when the Opening Day lineup is posted."
We say: Yes, unless Mike Rizzo can find someone better than Cristian Guzman to play second base. And he can, so the answer is no.
5. Between Stephen Strasburg and Drew Storen, who will have the biggest impact on the Nationals in 2010?
Rocket sez: "Storen."
We say: Strasburg's a starter, Storen's a closer, so between them would have to be a middle reliever, right? We'll go with Tyler Clippard and his fashion trend-setting goggles.
6. Will the Nationals trade Josh Willingham before the season starts?
Rocket sez: "All signs point to no."
We say: Maybe, and that's a significant upgrade from the Bowden regime when the answer would have been an unqualified, "Yes, for a scratched off lotto ticket and the fastest OF taken in the 1st round of the '99 amateur draft."
7. Will Nyjer Morgan's hand be 100 percent when Spring Training starts?
Rocket sez: "Yes. He's already hitting off a tee."
We say: No, he'll never play the viola again. And hitting off the tee is how Junior Spivey bit it.
8. Besides Marquis and John Lannan, who do you expect to be in the rotation in 2010?
Rocket sez: "Stammen, Detwiler and a PTBNL (pitcher to be named later)."
We say: If Rizzo stays in house, Stammen, Scott Olsen and J.D. Martin. If they bring in outside help, Stammen, John Smoltz and Livan. Yup, it's that bad.
9. Will Cristian Guzman play second base for Washington?
Rocket sez: "He will if Rizzo and Riggleman tell him to."
We say: Yes, unless Mike Rizzo can find someone better than Cristian Guzman to play second base. And he can, so the answer is no.
10. Who is the Nationals closer?
Rocket sez: "The survivor of the Bruney - Capps battle royale."
We say: Anybody but Kip Wells.
1. Will the Nationals play at least .500 baseball this season?
Rocket sez: "Too soon to tell. Ask again later."
We say: That's some quality Magic 8-Ball. But to actually answer the question, yes the Nats will go 2-2 over a four game stretch at some point in 2010, thereby playing .500 baseball. Wait, what... you mean .500 baseball for the season? Are you high?
2. Who is going to be the starting catcher?
Rocket sez: "Ivan Rodriguez."
We say: Boo! Bring back Wiki Gonzalez!
3. Will Elijah Dukes be the regular right fielder?
Rocket sez: "It's now or never."
We say: Define "regular". Seriously though, who's your alternative? Justin Maxwell? Willie Harris? It's Dukes' job until somebody better comes along.
4. Will Ian Desmond become the Opening Day shortop?
Rocket sez: "Answer unclear. Ask again when the Opening Day lineup is posted."
We say: Yes, unless Mike Rizzo can find someone better than Cristian Guzman to play second base. And he can, so the answer is no.
5. Between Stephen Strasburg and Drew Storen, who will have the biggest impact on the Nationals in 2010?
Rocket sez: "Storen."
We say: Strasburg's a starter, Storen's a closer, so between them would have to be a middle reliever, right? We'll go with Tyler Clippard and his fashion trend-setting goggles.
6. Will the Nationals trade Josh Willingham before the season starts?
Rocket sez: "All signs point to no."
We say: Maybe, and that's a significant upgrade from the Bowden regime when the answer would have been an unqualified, "Yes, for a scratched off lotto ticket and the fastest OF taken in the 1st round of the '99 amateur draft."
7. Will Nyjer Morgan's hand be 100 percent when Spring Training starts?
Rocket sez: "Yes. He's already hitting off a tee."
We say: No, he'll never play the viola again. And hitting off the tee is how Junior Spivey bit it.
8. Besides Marquis and John Lannan, who do you expect to be in the rotation in 2010?
Rocket sez: "Stammen, Detwiler and a PTBNL (pitcher to be named later)."
We say: If Rizzo stays in house, Stammen, Scott Olsen and J.D. Martin. If they bring in outside help, Stammen, John Smoltz and Livan. Yup, it's that bad.
9. Will Cristian Guzman play second base for Washington?
Rocket sez: "He will if Rizzo and Riggleman tell him to."
We say: Yes, unless Mike Rizzo can find someone better than Cristian Guzman to play second base. And he can, so the answer is no.
10. Who is the Nationals closer?
Rocket sez: "The survivor of the Bruney - Capps battle royale."
We say: Anybody but Kip Wells.
Josh Whitesell Goes Back To The Future
Think back to 2007. Barbaro sired a line of champion glue bottles. The Nats were bad, but nowhere near as bad as they would become. And Josh Whitesell assumed a prestigious position within the Washington Nationals organization: the "Larry Broadway Memorial marginally-talented first baseman who's destined never to sniff the big leagues." Previous award winners included perennial "First Baseman of the Future" Larry Broadway and, well... pretty much just Larry.
Josh was all set to bridge the gap between failed prospects Broadway and Chris Marrero when things went sideways. Claimed off waivers by the Arizona Diamondbacks in early 2008 the unthinkable happened; Arizona gave Whitesell his ticket to the show. After some success with a 2008 cup of coffee Josh struggled with extended exposure in 2009. Non-tendered by the D-Backs, Whitesell is now back with the organization that drafted him, ready to resume his rightful place in the hierarchy.
Josh was all set to bridge the gap between failed prospects Broadway and Chris Marrero when things went sideways. Claimed off waivers by the Arizona Diamondbacks in early 2008 the unthinkable happened; Arizona gave Whitesell his ticket to the show. After some success with a 2008 cup of coffee Josh struggled with extended exposure in 2009. Non-tendered by the D-Backs, Whitesell is now back with the organization that drafted him, ready to resume his rightful place in the hierarchy.
Guardado Capps Off a Marquis Week
Jason Marquis, Matt Capps and Eddie Guardado aren't going to carry the Washington Nationals to the playoffs in 2010. If Mike Rizzo rounds out the year by signing Orlando Hudson and John Smoltz to multiply Pudge Rodriguez's veteran-y goodness the Nats still won't be playing baseball in mid-October. Measured purely by that criteria the last week was a waste of $11M+. But that's dumb. By that measure teams like the Nats, Pirates, Royals, Astros, Orioles and Padres should just close up shop from October to February. No one trade or free agent signing is going to put any of these teams in contention in 2010, or 2011 for that matter.
If, on the other hand, the offseason is about improving your club, the Nats have had a very good week. Jason Marquis is no ace, but he'll give you 200 innings of league average pitching, sparing Nats fans from the 2010 version of the "Daniel Cabrera Experience." Matt Capps may not be the guy who'll make us all forget Chad Cordero, but I'll be perfectly happy to forget Julian Tavarez and Kip Wells. Eddie Guardado may not be Ron Villone... or maybe he is. Either way, a minor league contract with an invite to Spring Training is exactly the right way to go about finding your next designated "veteran lefty."
That's the important thing to keep in mind about this past week. It's less about the players than it is about the process. Marquis could have been Garland, or Piniero, or Sheets. For $15M over two years it's a signing that can only help stabilize the rotation. Is one year of a 26 year old closer with a career 119 ERA+ worth $3.5M? It is when your alternatives are Brian Bruney, Garrett Mock or the next Joel Hanrahan. Even if he's nothing more than a bridge to Drew Storen, what exactly is the downside to bringing Capps on board?
Rizzo's moves are encouraging because they don't assume that you have to sacrifice short-term improvement for long-term development, or vice versa. Somewhere between Jim Bowden's obsessive focus on the next five minutes and the analytic fascination with the next five years lies an approach that allows for building a winning team and a winning organization simultaneously. It's not yet clear that Rizzo or the Lerners are committed to this dual track approach (a strong bid for Aroldis Chapman would be nice evidence, Mike.) But I'm a Nats fan, so for the moment I'm clingling like grim death to any shred of hope that we might not have to endure two more seasons like the last two before we see that "first great Nationals team."
If, on the other hand, the offseason is about improving your club, the Nats have had a very good week. Jason Marquis is no ace, but he'll give you 200 innings of league average pitching, sparing Nats fans from the 2010 version of the "Daniel Cabrera Experience." Matt Capps may not be the guy who'll make us all forget Chad Cordero, but I'll be perfectly happy to forget Julian Tavarez and Kip Wells. Eddie Guardado may not be Ron Villone... or maybe he is. Either way, a minor league contract with an invite to Spring Training is exactly the right way to go about finding your next designated "veteran lefty."
That's the important thing to keep in mind about this past week. It's less about the players than it is about the process. Marquis could have been Garland, or Piniero, or Sheets. For $15M over two years it's a signing that can only help stabilize the rotation. Is one year of a 26 year old closer with a career 119 ERA+ worth $3.5M? It is when your alternatives are Brian Bruney, Garrett Mock or the next Joel Hanrahan. Even if he's nothing more than a bridge to Drew Storen, what exactly is the downside to bringing Capps on board?
Rizzo's moves are encouraging because they don't assume that you have to sacrifice short-term improvement for long-term development, or vice versa. Somewhere between Jim Bowden's obsessive focus on the next five minutes and the analytic fascination with the next five years lies an approach that allows for building a winning team and a winning organization simultaneously. It's not yet clear that Rizzo or the Lerners are committed to this dual track approach (a strong bid for Aroldis Chapman would be nice evidence, Mike.) But I'm a Nats fan, so for the moment I'm clingling like grim death to any shred of hope that we might not have to endure two more seasons like the last two before we see that "first great Nationals team."
Christmas Garland?
Ex-White Sox/Angels/D-Backs/Dodgers hurler Jon Garland is one of the ten (TEN?! - Does that include Oil Can Boyd?) free agents pitchers the Nats are eying this winter. Garland is apparently keeping company with guys like Jason Marquis, Joel Pineiro, Doug Davis and John Smoltz. (Seriously though, if they sign Smoltz don't they at least owe Dennis Boyd a tryout?)
Garland's career numbers are the very definition of unspectacular. A 104 ERA+, a K/BB ratio of 1.6; he's a lot like a right-handed John Lannan. On the plus side he's just 30 and can be predictably projected for 200 innings pitched with an ERA in the mid-fours. For the 2010 Washington Nationals those are #2 starter numbers.
Garland wants three years, the Nats are apparently offering two. I'd be okay with something in the 2 year/$15M or 3 yr/$20M dollar range. The third year doesn't bother me as much as it does other folks because honestly, beyond Strasburg and (maybe) Lannan, who are you penciling in to the 2012 Nationals rotation that's definitely going to improve on a 33-year old Jon Garland?
That said, Garland's not a marked improvement on any of the half dozen other mid-rotation innings eaters still on the maket, so if he want's $10M a year he's been hitting the egg nog a bit early. But he doesn't have to be a "steal" for the Nats to make out well. That Jon Garland would be the biggest free agent pitcher signing in the history of the Washington Nationals tells you pretty much all you need to know about the state of the pitching staff. He just has to offer some stability to the rotation beyond Lannan and (hopefully) Strasburg and he's worth any reasonable price.
An In-Speier-ed Pickup
H/T to MLB Trade Rumors for this minor AP item: The Nats signed former Rockies reliever Ryan Speier to a split minor league deal worth up to $425K. Speier is another reliever Rizzo should be familiar with from his time in the NL West. The 30 year old righty has solid career numbers, though he dealt with some injuries in 2009. He pitched better away from Coors (who doesn't?) but still has an impressive ability to keep the ball in the park. Assuming he's healthy he could probably replace Jason Bergmann as the designated right-handed reliever to face right-handed batters.
More important, Speier is a local guy, product of West Springfield High (Go Spartans!) and Radford University (Go Herpes!). Like former Nats SP "Irish Mike" O'Connor and current reliever Josh Wilkie, (George Washington University alums) Speier brings some much needed home cooking to the DC baseball scene. Major league baseball teams should have a lock on local talent. The Braves perfected the art of scouting Georgia and have reaped the rewards with players like Brian McCann and Jason Heyward.
The Nats have publicly committed to rebuilding scholastic and amateur baseball programs in Washington, DC and that's a great start, but you don't have to look any farther than franchise cornerstone Ryan Zimmerman to appreciate that Virginia has a thriving baseball culture that has produced players like David Wright, Mark Reynolds and the Upton brothers. The Braves, Mets and Orioles, through a combination of geographic proximity and minor league affiliations already have ties to baseball in Virginia. Signing a 30 year old reliever to a minor league deal isn't going to be the key that unlocks the Commonwealth's storehouse of baseball talent for the Nationals, but it's a start.
More important, Speier is a local guy, product of West Springfield High (Go Spartans!) and Radford University (Go Herpes!). Like former Nats SP "Irish Mike" O'Connor and current reliever Josh Wilkie, (George Washington University alums) Speier brings some much needed home cooking to the DC baseball scene. Major league baseball teams should have a lock on local talent. The Braves perfected the art of scouting Georgia and have reaped the rewards with players like Brian McCann and Jason Heyward.
The Nats have publicly committed to rebuilding scholastic and amateur baseball programs in Washington, DC and that's a great start, but you don't have to look any farther than franchise cornerstone Ryan Zimmerman to appreciate that Virginia has a thriving baseball culture that has produced players like David Wright, Mark Reynolds and the Upton brothers. The Braves, Mets and Orioles, through a combination of geographic proximity and minor league affiliations already have ties to baseball in Virginia. Signing a 30 year old reliever to a minor league deal isn't going to be the key that unlocks the Commonwealth's storehouse of baseball talent for the Nationals, but it's a start.
Not All Motion Is Progress
Mike Rizzo is (allegedly) not Jim Bowden. This offseason has been marked by a refreshing lack of impolitic outbursts, leather pants and dumpster-diving for toolsy outfielders. Until today you could also have said that Rizzo displayed a distinctly un-Trader Jim knack for not overvaluing replacement level relief pitching. Until today.
Let's be clear up front: Rizzo "overpaid" by sending the top pick in the Rule 5 draft to New York for reliever Brian Bruney. Bruney has a track record, and there's some value to that. Any baseball geek worth his Bill James Abstract will tell you that relief pitching is the most unstable, readily replaceable component of a major league roster. Any Nats fan that lived through last April, May and June will reply that yes, you can cobble together a relief corps from rookies, retreads and failed prospects, but it can take a grueling half season or more to get the mix right.
What worries me is Rizzo's increasingly evident preference for the known quantity over the raw talent. Think Nyjer Morgan for Lastings Milledge. The Nats got the better player, but the Pirates got the talent. Hiring a manager like Jim Riggleman is a textbook case for valuing track record over potential. In terms of today's deal, ex-Diamondback Brian Bruney's an established, hard-throwing, middle-inning reliever with undistinguished peripheral numbers. You don't have to uncover the Rule 5 draft's next Johan Santana, or even the next Joakim Soria, to get a younger, better player who'll be under club control for longer than Bruney. The next Luis Ayala would be a fine return for that number one pick.
As hot stove kickoffs go this deal was a resounding "Meh." It's tough to get either enthused or outraged about a 28-year old middle reliever, especially when he might not be any better than the guy who was cut to make room for him. On the other hand, I share FJB's hope that we're not merely in the beginning phase of replacing Bowden's CinciNationals with Rizzo's DiamondNats.
Speaking of which, doesn't signing a well-past-his prime Pudge Rodriguez to a TWO YEAR deal seem, well... Bowdenesque?
Let's be clear up front: Rizzo "overpaid" by sending the top pick in the Rule 5 draft to New York for reliever Brian Bruney. Bruney has a track record, and there's some value to that. Any baseball geek worth his Bill James Abstract will tell you that relief pitching is the most unstable, readily replaceable component of a major league roster. Any Nats fan that lived through last April, May and June will reply that yes, you can cobble together a relief corps from rookies, retreads and failed prospects, but it can take a grueling half season or more to get the mix right.
What worries me is Rizzo's increasingly evident preference for the known quantity over the raw talent. Think Nyjer Morgan for Lastings Milledge. The Nats got the better player, but the Pirates got the talent. Hiring a manager like Jim Riggleman is a textbook case for valuing track record over potential. In terms of today's deal, ex-Diamondback Brian Bruney's an established, hard-throwing, middle-inning reliever with undistinguished peripheral numbers. You don't have to uncover the Rule 5 draft's next Johan Santana, or even the next Joakim Soria, to get a younger, better player who'll be under club control for longer than Bruney. The next Luis Ayala would be a fine return for that number one pick.
As hot stove kickoffs go this deal was a resounding "Meh." It's tough to get either enthused or outraged about a 28-year old middle reliever, especially when he might not be any better than the guy who was cut to make room for him. On the other hand, I share FJB's hope that we're not merely in the beginning phase of replacing Bowden's CinciNationals with Rizzo's DiamondNats.
Speaking of which, doesn't signing a well-past-his prime Pudge Rodriguez to a TWO YEAR deal seem, well... Bowdenesque?
Non-News Is Good News
On the day that legitimately competitive baseball clubs were deciding whether to offer arbitration to their talented free agents, the only news out of NatsTown is that the team will not be handing out cash to the veteran free agent dreck that clogged last year's roster. Josh Bard, Livan Hernandez, Austin Kearns, Ron Villone and Dmitri Young will all be faced with the unenviable task of latching on with a club more desperate for "baseball players" than the 2009 Washington Nationals.
As "news" goes, this is right up there with the shocking revelations, reported first here on Nats Triple Play, that Nats pitchers will not be pitching underhand next season and the corpse of Honus Wagner will not be your 2010 Opening Day shortstop. Note that the Honus Wagner "story" is still subject to confirmation.
As to whether the team will be handing out cash to the slightly younger dreck that clogged last year's roster, Mike Rizzo has until December 12th to make that call. On arbitration questions NTP mostly lines up with fellow Natmospherians Brian at NFA and Steven at FJB (3-letter acronyms: It's what's hip!)
For nuanced analysis, read them. Here's my take:
Absolutely offer arbitration to: Jesus Flores (Duh) and Josh Willingham (Double Duh.)
Probably should offer arbitration to: Sean Burnett (All my kids are learning to pitch lefty from birth, if not before.)
I'm fine either way: Jason Bergmann (He can swing from bullpen to rotation, he won't cost too much and he's got tenure with the franchise; but he gives up too many walks and gopher balls.)
Don't offer arbitration to: Saul Rivera (look up "fungible") and Wil Nieves (Who?)
Dear God, please don't offer arbitration to: Mike MacDougal (Say you find $100 at the departure terminal at McCarran Airport in Las Vegas. You pocket the money and go. You do not conclude that you're on a "hot streak" and extend your trip to return to the casinos. Trust me on this one.)
Damn the torpedoes, offer arbitration to: Scott Olsen (This is where I part ways with Brian and Steven. I'm a little more optimistic about Olsen's rebound potential and a little less sanguine about the likelihood of replacing that potential on the open market. I'd lump Olsen in with the other second-tier starting pitchers recovering from injury and try to sign him to a comparable deal. Even an arbitration loss should (should) have a negligible impact on the 2010 payroll.)
That frees up three spots on the 40-man roster. You know who'd look good in those spots? Orlando Hudson, Rich Harden and the top pick in the Rule 5 draft. Get to work, Rizzo.
As "news" goes, this is right up there with the shocking revelations, reported first here on Nats Triple Play, that Nats pitchers will not be pitching underhand next season and the corpse of Honus Wagner will not be your 2010 Opening Day shortstop. Note that the Honus Wagner "story" is still subject to confirmation.
As to whether the team will be handing out cash to the slightly younger dreck that clogged last year's roster, Mike Rizzo has until December 12th to make that call. On arbitration questions NTP mostly lines up with fellow Natmospherians Brian at NFA and Steven at FJB (3-letter acronyms: It's what's hip!)
For nuanced analysis, read them. Here's my take:
Absolutely offer arbitration to: Jesus Flores (Duh) and Josh Willingham (Double Duh.)
Probably should offer arbitration to: Sean Burnett (All my kids are learning to pitch lefty from birth, if not before.)
I'm fine either way: Jason Bergmann (He can swing from bullpen to rotation, he won't cost too much and he's got tenure with the franchise; but he gives up too many walks and gopher balls.)
Don't offer arbitration to: Saul Rivera (look up "fungible") and Wil Nieves (Who?)
Dear God, please don't offer arbitration to: Mike MacDougal (Say you find $100 at the departure terminal at McCarran Airport in Las Vegas. You pocket the money and go. You do not conclude that you're on a "hot streak" and extend your trip to return to the casinos. Trust me on this one.)
Damn the torpedoes, offer arbitration to: Scott Olsen (This is where I part ways with Brian and Steven. I'm a little more optimistic about Olsen's rebound potential and a little less sanguine about the likelihood of replacing that potential on the open market. I'd lump Olsen in with the other second-tier starting pitchers recovering from injury and try to sign him to a comparable deal. Even an arbitration loss should (should) have a negligible impact on the 2010 payroll.)
That frees up three spots on the 40-man roster. You know who'd look good in those spots? Orlando Hudson, Rich Harden and the top pick in the Rule 5 draft. Get to work, Rizzo.
Chico Ain't The Man
Who knew that the toughest beat in DC wasn't the White House or the Pentagon, but Nationals Park? Just two years after Barry Svrluga (of sainted memory) left for the apparently more relaxing Redskins beat, WaPo Nats beat writer Aaron "Chico" Harlan is abandoning ship. Per the Post's memo obtained by FishbowlDC:
After two very long seasons doing an outstanding job covering the Washington Nationals, Chico Harlan is eager for a new challenge at the Post, and a well-deserved one. We do not fault Chico for having failed to bring winning baseball to the District. In fact, he now joins a long list of baseball writers who have come up short in that regard. What this means is that we are looking for a new reporter to cover the Nats.Now, some would argue that the Post has been, or should have been, looking for a new reporter to cover the Nats from the day Harlan started. He certainly didn't do himself any favors with his revelation to the Washingtonian that he doesn't particularly care for sports and would rather be a food writer, but he gets a pass from me.
As bloggers we've struggled (and failed) to find something interesting and relevant to say about the Washington Nationals that wasn't just long strings of profanity off and on for five years now. We've done it without deadlines, endless travel and dealing with reluctant players, coaches and executives, all while under pressure to break "news". As much as I love watching and writing about Nats baseball, I can't imagine doing Chico Harlan's job half as well as he did.
Bon appetit Chico. Nationals Journal's loss is the Food section's gain.
After two very long seasons doing an outstanding job covering the Washington Nationals, Chico Harlan is eager for a new challenge at the Post, and a well-deserved one. We do not fault Chico for having failed to bring winning baseball to the District. In fact, he now joins a long list of baseball writers who have come up short in that regard. What this means is that we are looking for a new reporter to cover the Nats.Now, some would argue that the Post has been, or should have been, looking for a new reporter to cover the Nats from the day Harlan started. He certainly didn't do himself any favors with his revelation to the Washingtonian that he doesn't particularly care for sports and would rather be a food writer, but he gets a pass from me.
As bloggers we've struggled (and failed) to find something interesting and relevant to say about the Washington Nationals that wasn't just long strings of profanity off and on for five years now. We've done it without deadlines, endless travel and dealing with reluctant players, coaches and executives, all while under pressure to break "news". As much as I love watching and writing about Nats baseball, I can't imagine doing Chico Harlan's job half as well as he did.
Bon appetit Chico. Nationals Journal's loss is the Food section's gain.