Beltway Boys
Tudorian Careers
Then something interesting happened. He found the flaw that was causing the problem and fixed it. Over the remainder of the season, Tudor went 20-1, 1.44, and led the Cardinals into the World Series against the Kansas City Royals. In his last five seasons (injuries cut short his career), the southpaw went 44-18, 2.78. In his first six years, he was just 69-54, 48-46 if you don't count that turnaround year in 1985.
The point is, he showed no real promise early in his career; he was a .500 pitcher and looked like he would always be just that. Then he had some sort of epiphany, and he finished his career as one of the best pitchers in the Major Leagues.
Right now, the Nationals have a couple of starting pitchers - Matt Chico & Jason Bergman - who are underwhelming Nationals' fans. Both have shown flashes of competency over their short careers, and could "get it" at some point and fix those faults that make them only pseudo-effective. Or they both will end up having careers where 12-11, 4.40 years are the norm and are welcomed by the Nationals. For now, that kind of production works. In the future, when the team matures and is finally ready to contend, it may not be enough. We'll just have to wait and see. dIn 2005, the Nationals had only one or two minor league pitchers that anyone thought had much of a chance to make an impact with the big club. A quick glance this morning found 14 pitchers who could make a difference: Ross Detwiler, Colin Balestar, Jack McGeary, Josh Smoker, Jordan Zimmermann, Colton Willems, Tyler Clippard, Garrett Mock, Mike O'Connor (I still like him), Shairon Martis, Jhonny Nunez, Adrian Alaniz, Hassan Pena and Cole Kimball. If just 30% of prospects (real prospects) become solid major leaguers, then the Nationals have 4-5 starters that will take their place in the Nationals' - or someone else's via a trade - rotation. fThe Nationals are going to be just fine. Shawn Hill, Bergman, Chico, Odalis Perez and Tim Redding are good enough for now. In time, we'll be able to tell if any of them will be like John Tudor and turn an average career into a stellar one. It'll hurt on the field until we all find out, but after all, none of us expected that much from these guys this year. 75 wins. 85 wins. Somewhere in between. Three years from now, no one will remember, and no one will care.hStay the course.gNow, while I'm not worried about the wins and losses, I must admit that the 15,000 or so empty seats the last few games is bothersome. Those same whispers about Washington not being a baseball town that we hear today were around forty years ago. I can remember dozens of games in the late 1960's where the attendance at RFK was 7,000 or less. So after losing two teams in ten years, yes, I am a little skittish when it comes to fannies in the seats. With a new stadium and a long lease, the team isn't going anywhere. That said, I don't want us to become a Cincinnati type team with a moderate payroll and inability to keep our free agents because we don't draw well. fFrankly, I was worried that the Nationals wouldn't be able to draw any more than 35,000 fans a night to watch the Marlins play. I hope - I pray - that the Braves series will average at least 30,000 per game. dThe Nationals try to stop a seven game losing streak tonight. Against Tim Hudson. Change of waking up tomorrow morning and finding the Nationals 3-8? Oh, I dunno -- 75%?ACHIEVING THE POSSIBLE
And they didn't. After nine games, they're 3-6.
Much, much better. Good job, guys.
Seriously, globally, the Nationals have yet to make me want to push the panic button. Individually, however, there are some concerns. Why is it, for example, that Jason Bergman can look like Bob Gibson for the first four innings and Hoot Gibson thereafter? And is Austin Kearns ever going to become a powerful right-fielder? Come August, they could ultimately become two of the Nationals' best players. I'm just saying ......
Each year, all of us take a look at the team's roster and predict what could happen. The problem is that our predictions are based on what the players could do and not what they probably will do. For example, here was my predictions for the '69 Senators (I know, I gotta start throwing some of this stuff away):
1B: Mike Epstein - .285-25-100
2b: Bernie Allen - .260-7-50
SS: Eddie Brinkman - .240-5-45
3B: Kenny McMullen - .260-25-90
LF: Frank Howard - .300-40-100
CF: Del Unser - .285-8-60
RF: Hank Allen - .277-13-65
C: Paul Cassanova - .250-8-45
No one prediction was off by much, yet as a group, these players (with Lee Maye replacing Hank Allen in right) really didn't come close because I assumed the best case scenario for each player. Now, take a look at my predictions for this year:
1B: Nick Johnson - .285-20-80
2B: Ronnie Belliard - .280-13-60
SS: Cristian Guzman - .270-5-45
3B: Ryan Zimmerman - .300-30-100
LF: Wily Mo Pena / Elijah Dukes - .270-25-90
CF: Lastings Milledge - .285-23-85
RF: Austin Kearns - .265-24-85
C: LoDuca / Estrada - .270-12-55
Again, each individual prediction seems reasonable, but as a group, I've probably guessed too high. Come October, three of these guys will probably do better, three will do worse, and two will do about what I figured.
And if that happens, the Nationals aren't going to have a great season.
Around the Minors: Michael Burgess his hitting just .200 for Hagerstown but has already hit two homers. He's struck out 9 times in 20 at-bats (ouch!). Bill Rhinehart continues to surprise. After hitting .299-5-43 for Vermont last season, he's at .318-1-6 in 22 at-bats for the Suns. The problem is Rhinehart is the same age as Ryan Zimmerman and is still playing 'A' ball. Andrew LeFave (also 23), obtained in the Ray King trade last year, is hitting just .083 in 2008. He has a career .348 career average in two minor league seasons.
YOUNG GUNS
[April 6th] -- Yeah, another bad game. Sure, the Nationals have now lost four games in a row after winning their first three.
No worries.
Any of us who went into 2008 with a "counting wins" perspective might be in for a very long summer. The team is still building and in some cases, still guessing as to who will - and won't - make a difference in the coming years.
We still have to look for stories-with-the-story to get a true sense of the team's progression towards respectability.
Like John Lannan's effort in an otherwise dismal 3-0 loss to the (not much better than us) St. Louis Cardinals.
Lannan, who was clearly the best Nats' starter in Spring Training, gets called up from Columbus and is asked to stop the team's three-game losing streak. Well, the Nationals lost, but he was about the most blameless player in a blue hat on Sunday.
Lannan pitched 6.2 innings, giving up 7 hits, 2 runs while striking out 4. Sixty-three percent of his pitches went for strikes and he left the game with a rather nifty 2.70 ERA. So, I'm thinking, what else does this guy have to do to become a permanent member of the Nationals' rotation? No question, he's still going to have his ups and downs, but let's give him some experience at the major league level so he'll be ready to make a difference next year, when things could really be fun.
But Lannan wasn't the only Nats' lefty to impress on Sunday.
Ross Detwiler was lights-out in his first start of the year for the Potomac Nationals. Detwiler (who pitched only 33 innings last year) threw 5 shutout innings against Salem, allowing just 3 hits and a walk while striking out 7. "A man among boys" was the way the Salem Avalanche broadcaster described the situation.
I understand that Jim Bowden wants Detwiler to succeed before promoting him, but if he's not going to be challenged in Potomac, send him north to Harrisburg.
So we've got these two guys - both young, both 6'5", both 200 pounds - and both will be ready to help the Nationals in 2009. But there is someone else who could be ready to make a difference as well.
Mike O'Connor, another [fairly] young, tall lefty.
O'Connor was the only one not considered to be a future major leaguer, and yet he has pitched extremely well both in spring training and in his first start with the Clippers, allowing just two hits and two walks while striking out four in five innings. Remember, before he was injured, he was one of the Nationals most consistent starters in 2006. In his first 12 starts - through the end of June - O'Connor had a record of 3-4, 3.39 in 12 starts, allowing just 49 hits in 58 innings while striking out 45. Over his next four starts, O'Connor gave up 22 runs in 15 innings (13.29 ERA) and ended the year 3-8, 4.80. I think it safe to assume that's when his elbow problems began.
So if O'Connor reverts to form - and perhaps he already has - and can once again get major league batters out, the Nationals could be sitting on a treasure trove of left-handed pitching, especially if Matt Chico's second start was an aberration.
Time will tell.
Let's get back to Matt Chico for just a second. Though his numbers didn't look very good in that first start in Philadelphia, and nothing looked very good against the Cardinals, there are still some very positive signs for the kid. Sure, he's given up 14 hits and 7 runs in 11.1 innings, but he's also struck out 9 and walked just 3. That's 7 strikeouts and 2.4 walks per 9 innings. Last year, he averaged 3.98 walks per 9 innings and just 4.75 walks per 9. He still gives up too many hits, but - regardless of his numbers thus far - he seems to pitching much better in 2008.
This-N-That: Felipe Lopez has started four straight games and the Nationals have lost four straight games. Coincidence? Probably. His defense in left wasn't bad at all - much better than Alfonso Soriano at first - but he continues a downward spiral with his bat. He's now batting .188 (3-16) with a .278 OBP and 5 strikeouts. Certainly, it's a small sample, but I'm not seeing any value here, both trade and on the field .... After a slow start, Ryan Zimmerman has raised his batting average to .290 with 6 hits over the weekend. Amazingly, he has cut down his strikeouts this year, fanning only 3 times in 31 at-bats (once very 10.3 at-bats). For his career, he's struckout once every 5.2 at-bats .... Paul LoDuca has looked really bad at the plate so far (.167) but he's yet to strikeout. I thought this to be an aberration, but no - LoDuca has excellent plate discipline. Over his career, he's averaged just 43 strikeouts per 550 at-bats .... Has anyone else begun to moan and groan when Willie Harris (1-12) comes to the plate? .... It's obvious that Joel Hanrahan wouldn't continue to pitch as well as he did this spring, but really, he's not too far away. Though he has a 6.00 ERA, he's given up just 2 hits in 3 innings while striking out 5. I think Manny Acta is very pleased with his work so far.
BACK TO REALITY & IT'S GOOD TO BE BACK
And so they did. The Nationals finished 31-50 and limped home with a .500 record.
So, thirty-seven innings into the season, we really don't know much more than we did during that last week of spring training. The great majority of journalists and bloggers are predicting anywhere from 75-85 wins, and that sounds about right.
I think it's great that players on the Braves and Phillies have remarked that the Nationals seem much improved. They are right, of course. How much improved still remains to be seen. There is no question, however, that the new players have a far higher upside than those they replaced. So they could be much better than anticipated if they all play up to their potential. How much better? In the perfect world, this is how good the Nationals' offense could be:
Cristian Guzman (SS) - .275-7-50
Lastings Milledge (CF) - .289-24-75
Ryan Zimmerman (3B) - .290-30-110
Nick Johnson (1B) - .280-20-90
Austin Kearns (RF) - .270-24-88
Pena/Dukes (LF) - .265-25-75
Ronnie Belliard (2B) - .275-13-55
LoDuca / Estrada (C) - .270-10-50
That's 153 homers for the starters, more than the entire team hit last year. If Kearns and Dukes/Pena do well when they return from the DL, it could even be more than that. And I'm not sure about Milledge; he could amaze us all as the season progresses.The starting pitching staff could be equally potent - again - if health issues stop dogging the Nationals:
Odalis Perez: 12-10 4.00
Matt Chico: 12-11 4.22
Tim Redding: 13-8 3.66
Jason Bergman: 11-9 3.88
Shawn Hill: 10-5 3.44 (assuming he returns in time)
These five could amass 57 wins this year, a good number compared to last year's 39 wins by the all of those starters. Add those 18 extra wins to last years 73 and the Nationals could end up with a record of 91-72. Of course, there is no way that every player is going to play healthy or up to expectations.So lets cut those 18 extra wins in half.
Voila! The Nats will finish 2008 at 82-78.
The wild card in all of this is how well the team's minor league pitchers will do this year. I mean, did you see that starting rotation for Columbus? Mike O'Connor. John Lannan. Tyler Clippard. Colin Balestar. Garrett Mock. Lannan of course, will join the Nats over the weekend. If these pitchers can fill the holes in the team's rotation due to injuries or poor performance, those 82 wins seem a certainty.
Of that group, O'Connor was the only one not considered to be a future major leaguer, and yet he has pitched extremely well both in spring training and in his first start with the Clippers, allowing just two hits and two walks while striking out four in five innings. Remember, before he was injured, he was one of the Nationals most consistent starters in 2006. In his first 12 starts - through the end of June - O'Connor had a record of 3-4, 3.39 in 12 starts, allowing just 49 hits in 58 innings while striking out 45. Over his next four starts, O'Connor gave up 22 runs in 15 innings (13.29 ERA) and ended the year 3-8, 4.80. I think it safe to assume that's when his elbow problems began.
So it's not like any success O'Connor might have this year would come as a surprise. He's already had success - good success - at the major league level. If he returns to form, the Nationals could then have five - count 'em, FIVE - major league caliber pitchers at the AAA level.
Who said that all that pitching help is years away?
First Impressions of 2008:
- Jason Bergman (8.84) and Matt Chico (5.06) don't have very impressive ERA's, but I think they both pitched well in their first outings of the year. One of Chico's three runs given up came via a mistake by Lastings Milledge in the outfield, and another run was a one-pitch mistake that was hit for a homer. And Jason Bergman was lights-out for five innings before he tired and lost command of his pitches. His new change looked good. I'll bet that both of these guys will end the year with 10-12 wins and an ERA near 4.00.
- Even though Ryan Zimmerman is batting just .167 and has just three hits, the Nationals could easily have a record of 1-3 without him. Had he started this way in 2005 or 2006, I'd be worried. No more. He's proven he's a stud.
- I have no idea if Odalis Perez will ever pitch that well again for the Nationals this year, but boy, I hope he does.
- How stupid will the Nationals look if Jesus Flores is hitting .350 or so when they send him down to Harrisburg to "get better?" All he did in his first game was go 3-4 with 2 doubles.
SEVERING THAT LAST REAL LINK IS HARD
HOW GOOD IS BURGESS?
[January 18th] -- First, sorry I haven't posted in a while. Daily posting was number two on my New Year's resolution list, but the real world isn't a perfect place in terms of allowing said resolutions to be fulfilled. We have been given the opportunity to adopt our special-needs foster son. We've had him since he was a month old (he's almost 3 now) and - assuming the paperwork goes through - it looks like he'll become the newest member of Nats' Nation. Any of you who have gone through the process knows how difficult - and time consuming - it can be.
That said, we're thrilled at the opportunity.
On to baseball.
How good will Michael Burgess be? Your guess is as good as mine, but if you use his stats in the Gulf Coast League this past year as a yardstick, he should do very well indeed.
I was looking up a player on the 1994 GCL Expos and noticed Vlad Guerrero's first year stats. They were impressive, and from there he matured into one of the most feared hitters of his generation. But let's take a look at his numbers compared to Burgess' when extrapolated out to 550 at-bats, a full Major League season. See what you think:
1994 - Guerrero: R:98 -- H:176 -- 2B:53 -- 3B: 12 -- HR:20 -- RBI:102 -- BB:44 -- K:73 -- Ave:.314 -- OPS:.928
2007 - Burgess: R:94 -- H:184 -- 2B:26 -- 3B:13 -- HR:34 -- RBI:137 -- BB:107 -- 159 -- Ave:.333 -- OPS:1.059
The two players had very similar first years, though there were some differences. Guerrero's power wasn't as developed as Burgess. Vlad had 27 more doubles but 14 less homers. Burgess walked a lot more though he struck out more often too. Guerrero's .366 OBP was very good but pales in comparison to Burgess' .442.
I'm not suggesting that Burgess is the next Vlad Guerrero. What I am saying is that Burgess has the potential to be a great player. After being initially over matched when he was promoted to Vermont at the end of the season, Burgess found his stroke and did well in 19 games. Again, based on a full season, Burgess produced: .286-24-80.
Looks like the Nationals' outfield will be even more crowded in the very near future.
Certain Uncertainty: Usually, a baseball team heads into spring training with a few question marks and a good deal of certainty. For the Nationals, the offense is so questionable that it could be one of the better, or one of the worst, offenses in the National League. As of today, Ronnie Belliard is about the only "sure thing" in the lineup.
Will it be Nick Johnson or Dmitri Young at first? And if it's Johnson, will he come close to repeating 2007's numbers?
Will Felipe Lopez rebound from a poor 2007, or for that matter will he even start? He'll be playing in a smaller park this year so if he does rebound, a .275-18-60 is not out of the question. And if he doesn't rebound, will Cristian Guzman play enough defense to make his offense palatable?
It may seem strange to list Ryan Zimmerman as a question mark, but really, no one knows if he'll have another "nice" year, something like .280-25-100, or will he have that breakout year we've all been waiting for, say .310-35-120?
Wily Mo Pena has the talent to hit .280-45-120. But will he? And if he doesn't, will Jim Bowden settle for .260-22-75 or will Pena be benched in favor of Elijah Dukes, another player who may - or may not - hit 35 homers and drive in 100 RBI's. And what of Lastings Milledge? As the only real center fielder among the bunch, Milledge has more opportunity to grow slowly as a starter than the others. But he's already hit at the Major League level, so a .285-25-85 effort would surprise no one. And Austin Kearns has shown the ability to hit 25 homers and drive in 100 runs, but he just can't seem to do it year in and year out. Based on past history, 2008 will be the year he shows up and plays well every day.
Paul Lo Duca is perhaps the biggest question mark with the least importance; it really won't matter if Lo Duca hits well or not. He just has to catch the ball behind the plate.
The Nationals could end up hitting 200 homers, or they might barely break 100. Spring Training won't tell us anything, but we'll know something by July 1st.