Friday, March 19, 2010

If not Dukes, why not Damon?

In hindsight, knowing now that the Nationals had been at least strongly considering moving on from Elijah Dukes for weeks if not months, it raises questions about how the team approached the roster make-up this off-season. In particular, it's puzzling why the team never even made an effort to sign Johnny Damon, an underpaid near-all-star player who had no home at all less than a month ago.

After badly overplaying his hand in negotiations with the Yankees, Johnny Damon ended up without a team until late February. He eventually signed with Detroit for one year and $8 million. Damon gave the Yankees 6.8 wins above replacement over the last two seasons--not quite all-star level, but enough to make him the second or third best player on the Nationals. CHONE projects him to hit .268 / .350 / .425, and he's still an above average defender in left (assuming Willingham would move to right).

Damon's obviously a rental, and he'd get the team at best from maybe 74 wins to 76 wins. But it's not like the Nationals have payroll issues. They seem more than anxious to keep paying Adam Dunn even more money for lesser production. This is the kind of signing that the Nationals could make to get better in the near-term with no downside long-term.

It's certainly possible that Damon wouldn't have come to DC, but for the team to be sitting there in mid-February, knowing that there was a seriously high likelihood of starting the year with Justin Maxwell or Willie Harris starting in right, it's crazy that they wouldn't even make a run at a player of Damon's caliber.

10 comments:

Kevin Reiss said...

All things being equal, I'd say it's a fair question to ask why Rizzo, who apparently had in in for Dukes all along, didn't pursue Damon or another competent replacement in advance of firing a starting outfielder. But this is the Nats we're talking about. They think they can be competitive in 2011 despite numerous holes in the lineup and questions surrounding the pitching staff. They believe that the marginal improvement in clubhouse happiness caused by dumping Dukes can only help them along.

I think you have to question the fundamental assumptions behind all Rizzo's decisions. Asking why Rizzo didn't sign Damon when he knew there was a good chance he would need another outfielder is almost irrelevant.

phil dunn said...

The Nats would never have paid Damon $8 million and Damon would never have played for the Nats, anyway.

Steven said...

If they're paying Dunn $12 million, why wouldn't they pay Damon, at least an equal player, if not better, $8 million? If they offered him $12 million, you don't think he'd take it? And even if he wouldn't is it Rizzo's job to not even try?

phil dunn said...

Stephen, You are ignoring the fact that Dunn was signed last year, when Ted Lerner's net worth was $3.2 billion. Forbes Magazine just reported that Ted's net worth has dropped to $3.0 billion. Beyond that, he just lost another 100 grand plus by dumping Dukes. He's going broke. Seriously, Damon might be worth $8 million if he was the missing piece between contending and not contending, which was probably the case for the Tigers and the Braves, two clubs interested in signing him. The Nats are so far from contending that Damon doesn't really make much difference.

Fake Reiss said...

Rizzo didn't have it in for Dukes. Rizzo gave Dukes every chance in the world, and Dukes just couldn't cut the mustard on the field. Rizzo didn't expect to have to cut him, and that's clear from the fact that Rizzo didn't bring in a potential replacement for Dukes to challenge him in spring training. Although maybe he should have, it might have spurred Dukes on.

Chris Needham however is a bigoted douchebag, and that's clearly what cost him his gig at NBC Washington.

1stBaseCoach said...

Rizzo is perceived as one of the most secretive GM's out there. No one here has any dope to claim that he did or did not inquire about Damon...or any other quality player

One thing we do know: the "Learners" are cheap...and the franchise is a well-known joke. Yet you are still surprised that big names are not being publicly pursued?!? Duh.

Anonymous said...

Be serious, please. Did you see Damon played left field last season. His arm is so weak, he barely can reach the second base with a throw from left field. He is probably one of the worst outfielder and in the meantime the most overated player in the major leagues. Please, guys, stop saying the Lerner are cheap and start thinking a little bit more...

erocks33 said...

I actually wanted the Nats to sign Xavier Nady in the off season. He's versatile (can play LF/RF/1B), can hit for average and some power, and plays good defense.

CoverageisLacking said...

For anyone wondering, that's not me who posted that trash above.

It's amazing to me how some people choose to spend their time. But I guess some have a lot of time on their hands to spend. Gee, I wonder in this case whom it might be?????

CoverageisLacking said...

As to the substance of your post, Steven, I think you are exactly right. I don't know about Damon specifically. But the fact that Rizzo didn't add another big league outfielder during the offseason is a serious black mark against him, given his lack of confidence in Dukes.

The Nats went into Spring Training last season with five "big league" (at least in the Nats' minds) outfielders. This year, they had three, and now we learn that they had serious doubts about one of them. Yet they did nothing to fill the gap that releasing Dukes would create. It really is hard to understand how Rizzo allowed the Nats to get in the position in which they now find themselves.