Is it Still Correct to Say the Lerners Are Cheap?

In their first two years running the Nationals, the Lerners and Stan Kasten operated on the shortest of short shoestring budgets. They've taken relentless flak, and they deserve it.

But it's hard to deny that after losing 100 games in 2008, Stan Kasten and the Lerners changed their approach to spending on players, at least a little bit. The question now: have they done enough that it's no longer accurate to say they're cheap?

Let's look closer at the spending. Starting in the winter of 2008-2009, they signed Adam Dunn, offered $180 million or so to Mark Teixeira, traded for Josh Willingham and Scott Olsen in a trade that was 100% about taking on salary. Then, they re-signed Ryan Zimmerman long-term, ponied up the record bonus needed to sign Stephen Strasburg, and didn't even try to dump Adam Dunn's salary at the trade deadline. Those may or may not have been all good decisions, but they were all more expensive decisions. Bottom line, that's a pretty healthy year of spending for most any team.

And this last off-season they didn't make any blockbuster deals (though if it's to believed they were right there for Aroldis Chapman), but they coughed up almost $30 million for Jason Marquis, Chien-Ming Wang, Ivan Rodriguez, and Matt Capps. That's not really a shopping spree, but it's surely not what skinflints do.

I would have liked to see another starter from the Jon Garland/Jarrod Washburn tier, and a lot of people seemed to have their hearts set on Orlando Hudson, but it seems to me that Rizzo had the money to get the guys he wanted--for better or worse.

Now, Boz says it's still the payroll, stupid. He points to the Nationals' $60m payroll, which exceeds only Florida's, Pittsburgh's and San Diego's. If the team had a bigger payroll, he says, they'd be better. And there's no excuse for that.

The problem is that it just doesn't quite work that way. Free agents are (all together now) by definition older, declining players. Teams lock up their best players long-term before they ever hit the market.

And it really is possible to make your team worse by spending. The top two contracts in the 2006 off-season went to Alfonso Soriano and Barry Zito. Only a few rungs cheaper were Gary Matthews, Jason Schmidt, and Juan Pierre. In 2007, five of the top eight contracts (not counting the not really available Mariano Rivera, A-Rod and Jorge Posada) went to Carlos Silva, Andruw Jones, Jose Guillen, Luis Castillo and Aaron Rowand. In 2008, the Yankees bought up Teixeira, CC Sabathia, and A.J. Burnett. Those have worked out so far. But after that the top ten contracts includes major disappointments like Derek Lowe, Oliver Perez, Milton Bradley, Manny Ramirez, and Ryan Dempster.

We'll see how this past off-season's big contracts work out, but there are a lot of big contracts over the last few years that Boz publicly called on the team to hand out (and admittedly I wanted Derek Lowe), and the team would clearly be worse off if they had done it. Just look at Soriano. The Cubs are married to him at $20 million a year till he's 38. At age 33 he was already one of the worst LFs in the league.

Now, I have nits to pick on the team's spending. My biggest gripe is still the signability picks in the draft, like Trevor Holder. But I think Nationals fans actually have seen enough at this point to start to feel a little better about their team's willingness to spend.

Don't get me wrong--fans have every right to complain about whatever they like until they have a winner, and the Lerners deserve our wrath for what they've put us through. And I think Ted, Mark, and Stan would really really prefer to go back to the skinflint days and may do so anytime.

But, for now, on this one thing, I'm choosing to see the glass as half-full. (Take THAT Mr. Anonymous commenter who says I'm never positive about anything!)

Riggleman's Half-Regrets on Kerry Wood

With Stephen Strasburg's emergence as the best pitching prospect in a generation, a number of people have been asking Jim Riggleman lately about what went wrong with the last best pitching prospect in a generation: Kerry Wood. Chico Harlan did a piece on it this week, and Kerry Wood commented on it earlier today.

Now, I'm glad to hear Riggleman say he wouldn't work Wood the way he did in 1998. For Strasburg's sake, I sure hope not.

The thing that still annoys me about Riggleman's statements on Wood (and I've now at least three times heard him in person give more or less the same answer verbatim that he gave Chico) is that he still can't quite bring himself to just say he was wrong and leave it at that.

Every time, he says that although he would have done it differently if he'd been clairvoyant and known what was going to happen, that a) "we were in a pennant race," b) he "probably would have gotten hurt anyway," and c) "At the time that we had Kerry, my recollection of any criticism I had was 'Why did you take him out of the game?' After the fact it's 'Well, you pitched him too much.' "

Now, if you really think you screwed up, you'd just say, "look, I screwed up, I take the blame, and I should have made different decisions. But it's that last one that really gets my goat, because I was in Chicago at the time and I remember personally worrying about the phenom's workload, not to mention the concerns raised in the press.

There aren't many news sites with archives that deep, but Baseball Prospectus does. Here's Rany Jazayerli on July 24, 1998:

Please, Mr. Riggleman, please... unlike Leyland and Francona, Jim Riggleman hasn't picked on any one pitcher, spreading the [pitcher abuse] around. But when your staff leader is 21 and has the most promising arm of the decade, it's not enough to be cautious - you have to be downright paranoid. Riggleman hasn't let Kerry Wood crack 130 yet, but he's thrown 128 once, 122 four times, and 121 once. Rule of thumb, Jim: don't let Wood start the 7th unless his pitch count is still in double digits.

So Jim, how about if we cut out the stuff about how no one raised these concerns at the time?

Three Nationals Make Baseball America Top 100

For only the second time since 2002, the Nationals/Expos franchise has three players on the Baseball America top 100 prospects list: Stephen Strasburg (a surprise #2, just behind Atlanta's Jason Heyward), Derek Norris (#38), and Drew Storen (#92, or 52 spots behind Aaron Crow--just sayin').

And Ian Desmond or Danny Espinosa very easily could have given the team a fourth top 100 pick, which hasn't happened since the franchise had six of the top 100 in 1999 (Michael Barrett, Peter Bergeron, Ted Lilly, Milton Bradley, Guillermo Mota, Tony Armas).

Click here to read all the scouting reports. I would say it's well worth the subscription (and I didn't steer you wrong on Zuckerman did I?): http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/rankings/top-100-prospects/2010/269546.html.

Must-Listen Audio: The Guardado Story

If you aren't one of the Mark Zuckerman subscribers at Nats Insider, lemme tell you--you're missing out. The (uncensored) audio on the Eddie Guardado story about being "traded" to the Nationals is classic. Go over there and kick Mark ten bucks to get the file. You won't regret it. And just wait till he asks Scott Olsen what happened with Randy Messenger. And when he asks Elijah Dukes for dating tips, that'll be classic. But the kicker will be when he starts asking players for their best Jim Bowden stories. You won't want to miss it.

Things to Root for this Spring Training

I admit, I'm overdue for some positive thinking. Here's my list of things to root for this spring.

• Health

Athletes working themselves back into playing shape are always at risk of injury. And baseball players even moreso. There's nothing the Nationals could do this spring that would help win more games than to simply make it to Opening Day with no more significant injuries.

• A breakthrough (or two) on the pitching staff

Remember when Joel Hanrahan struck out eight out of nine Braves in a row in March 2008? No? OK, he did, and it was an impressive sign of good things to come for him. This is a guy who flailed for almost seven years in the Dodgers organization and showed no signs of turning his career around when 2007 ended. Then, he just took a step forward on command, and he's been a serviceable reliever ever since. Guys to watch who could take "the Hanrahan leap" this year: Garrett Mock, Luis Atilano, Collin Balester, Atahualpa Severino, Logan Kensing, and Victor Garate.

• Elijah Dukes' strike zone command

The conventional wisdom is that Dukes needs "learn how to hit a curve." The reality is that good big league curve balls are really hard to hit--most hitters can't do it. The good news is that most pitchers can't consistently throw good curveballs for strikes either. So what good hitters do is they take when they can, work the count, force the pitcher to throw a get-me-over pitch, and pound fat fastballs. Dukes's problem last year was that for the first time since he was a teenager he started chasing. He needs to get back to what made him such a good young hitter in the first place: eye-popping power and excellent plate discipline.

• Fast starts from possible tradable veterans, like Josh Willingham, Adam Dunn, Jason Marquis, and Chien-Ming Wang

As long as these five guys are playing well, the Nationals will get some decent offers for them at the trade deadline. But too many GMs still get distracted by very small sample sizes, so the last thing you want is a prolonged early slump.

Jim Bowden: Misunderstood Genius

Oh. My. God. All Nationals fans have to watch this. Just, wow.



Update: In my immediate shock, I had to get this up fast. Really, this is like something out of 30 Rock or something. But here are a few of the more unbelievable moments, even to me, a seasoned Bowden gawker:

• "Carmine? Is she hot?" "I think he might be a guy, actually." "Oh, nevermind."
• "OPS" as a newfangled stat.
• "and these OBPATUZXYZ figures..."
• A fascinating revisionist history blaming both statheads and scouts for his infamous Paul O'Neill-Roberto Kelly trade.
• The breasts. I mean, really?

Good Story by Chico in the Post

Since he's already paid, you don't have to donate. But Chico Harlan wrote an excellent story on the arbitration process for today's paper with revealing quotes from a number of players. Somehow his editors cut the important bit of context that the Nationals have gone to arbitration nine times more often than all the other teams in baseball since the Kasten-Lerner regime began (6 hearings for the Nationals, 20 for the other 29 teams). Regardless of your take on the issue, that's a relevant and notable fact that shouldn't have been left out of this story. But now you know.

The Follow-Up Question Not Asked

Yesterday Jim Riggleman was asked about Ross Detwiler's hip surgery, and he said:

"My understanding is, this is the first time he ever said a word about it. When Detwiler said it, it was news to us," Manager Jim Riggleman said. "So they went and checked it out. I'm guessing... but I think he probably has been feeling something for a while and thought, 'Well, I'm all right.' As athletes you just figure, 'Oh, this is nothing; I'll get through this.' And it probably was nagging, and when he got here and it was still nagging. And then he went into the trainer and said, 'This doesn't feel good.' And it was a fairly serious problem, and it had to be alleviated. Obviously if he had said in October or November that my hip hurts, it would have been checked out.

So, to sum up, it's Detwiler's fault, and the team isn't responsible, and it's Detwiler's fault.

Here's the key question: "Isn't it your responsibility as the manager to have a close enough relationship with your players that if something like this is happening, you know about it? Regardless of what else happened, if a player is hurting on your watch, and you don't know about it, isn't that an indictment of you as a manager? What went wrong with your relationship with Ross that you as the person responsible for the team weren't on top of this situation?"

New Podcast at "Natmoshere in your Ear"

Brian Oliver from Nationals Farm Authority to talk about Wang, Detwiler, and the key stories to watch in spring training. Click here to listen and subscribe on I-Tunes or whatever podcatcher you like: http://natmosphere.mypodcast.com/2010/02/Natmosphere_in_your_Ear_February_19_2010-288955.html

Updated Nationals Wins Above Replacement Projection

Just a couple changes, the big one being giving a bunch of Ross Detwiler's innings to Chien Ming-Wang. Wang's projection (like Olsen's) are optimistic given their health, but with these numbers, you get a 76-win projection. Cue the "I'll take that!" comments.

Pos	Name	PT	wOBA	FRAA	WAR
C	Jesus Flores	40%	.324	0.0	1.1
C	Ivan Rodriguez	60%	.290	0.0	0.5
1B	Adam Dunn	65%	.378	-8.4	1.8
1B	Mike Morse	35%	.343	0.3	0.5
2B	Adam Kennedy	75%	.313	1.8	1.0
2B	Willie Harris	25%	.328	-1.1	0.5
SS	Cristian Guzman	75%	.316	-2.0	1.2
SS	Ian Desmond	25%	.324	-4.5	0.5
3B	Ryan Zimmerman	85%	.379	10.1	5.2
3B	Ian Desmond	15%	.324	0.0	0.3
RF	Elijah Dukes	75%	.351	1.9	2.0
RF	Mike Morse	25%	.343	-0.3	0.5
CF	Nyjer Morgan	85%	.321	8.5	2.1
CF	Willie Harris	15%	.328	-0.6	0.3
LF	Josh Willingham	80%	.361	-6.0	2.8
LF	Adam Dunn	20%	.378	-10.8	0.6
	Total				20.9

		IP	FIP	WAR
SP	Jason Marquis	180	4.46	2.1
SP	John Lannan	170	4.82	1.3
SP	Craig Stammen	120	4.96	0.7
SP	Garrett Mock	120	4.28	1.6
SP	J.D. Martin	120	4.77	1.0
SP	Scott Olsen	80	5.12	0.3
SP	Chien-Ming Wang	70	3.94	1.2
SP	Ross Detwiler	40	4.71	0.3
SP	Stephen Strasburg	40	4.18	0.6
RP	Matt Capps	65	3.82	0.5
RP	Brian Bruney	50	4.35	0.1
RP	Tyler Clippard	65	4.20	0.2
RP	Tyler Walker	50	4.29	0.1
RP	Sean Burnett	55	4.63	-0.1
RP	Jason Bergmann	60	4.47	0.0
RP	Miguel Batista	30	4.86	-0.1
RP	Eddie Guardado	40	4.94	-0.2
RP	Collin Balester	50	5.06	-0.3
RP	Drew Storen	20	5.88	-0.3
	Total	1425		9.0

"Part of me has changed since that arbitration meeting"

Federal Baseball has the transcript up of the Brian Bruney interview today on XM in which he basically spills his guts about how the team tore him apart and lost his trust at the arbitration hearing this week.

First lemme say to Brian on behalf of all Nationals fans--please don't hold Stan Kasten against us. It's not our fault.

To the rest of you, read this transcript. I sure hope Jim Riggleman has some magic way to break the ice, because I can feel the chill from here.

"You Suck--Welcome Back!!"

That's basically how arbitration hearings are described by the few people who have been inside the room and talked about it afterward. The team makes it's best case that the player doesn't deserve what he's asking for, while the player sticks up for himself. It's a process that has caused lingering resentments between player and team in more than one case.

That's a big part of why arbitration hearings are so rare. Teams and players both try to avoid them and settle on a contract that's acceptable to both so they can avoid the negative fall-out of a confrontational hearing. It's just not worth the downsides of the process to save the relatively small amounts of money at stake.

Except the Nationals. The Nationals love to go to arbitration.

In fact, the Nationals are the only team in baseball to take at least on player to the hearing every year since the Nationals came to DC. Thirty-five players have gone to hearings in that time (five of these are scheduled hearings for this week that could get settled in advance). Here's the breakdown of arbitration hearings by team since 2005:

Nationals: 7 (Shawn Hill, Brian Bruney, Chad Cordero, Alfonso Soriano, John Patterson, Felipe Lopez, and Sean Burnett*)
Rays: 4
Marlins: 3
Astros: 3 (1 scheduled)
Angels: 3 (2 scheduled)
Rockies: 2
Royals: 2
Twins: 2
Cubs: 1 (scheduled)
Mets: 1
Phillies: 1
Dodgers: 1
Padres: 1
Orioles: 1
Yankees: 1
Brewers: 1
A's: 1
*scheduled

What jumps out at you here isn't just that the Nationals go to arbitration with so many more players than other teams. It's that the Nationals have had so many problems after those hearings. Lopez and Soriano both became major clubhouse distractions. Cordero refused to even consider coming back to the team after he was non-tendered. There were other issues in each of these cases, but the risk of fallout is anything but a theoretical concern with the Nationals.

Also, the Nationals not only go to arb more than anyone else, they do it over relatively tiny amounts of money. Of the last eight players since the '05-'06 off-season to go to a hearing over $250,000 or less between the club and player figures, three of them were Nationals (Lopez, Hill, Bruney).

Remember, usually the team and player split the difference and walk away happy. So we're really talking about going to war over around $125,000 per player. That's not even one-third of a season for a minimum wage player. The only reason you do that is to make a point or to be obstinate.

Now, I'm sure there are as many times when it's the player who's being obstinate as the team. But when you have the same team again and again going through these kinds of difficult negotiations, on top of failure to sign draft picks, etc., the circumstantial evidence would point in one direction.

We shouldn't be all that surprised, given all that talk over the years about "how the Lerners do business," fighting over the cost of a postage stamp, etc. But if Bruney or Burnett start acting up about their roles or otherwise being a clubhouse malcontent, remember, that could be part of the price of the Lerner way of doing business.

Chieng Music (or, a New Ming Dynasty?)

All the stupid Wang puns across the NatRoots have left things pretty wide open for the Chien and Ming puns, so let's get started...

Here's what I wrote about Wang last week in my post last week on the remaining useful free agents out there:

The big question is his health. Over the last two years, his velocity has declined, his walks have gone up, and he's missed a bunch of time. He's coming off surgery for a torn shoulder capsule, which I've never heard of, but it sounds terrible. But if he can come back close to the guy he was, he's a very useful pitcher. He's never struck anyone out, but he pounds the zone with groundballs and would benefit from the move to the easier league. Still, this is a definite buyer-beware situation, and he's anything but the solution to the innings need.

The Nationals are paying Wang $2 million for this season, which could easily be just paying for the pleasure of overseeing his rehab.

But since he won't qualify for free agency till after the 2011 season at the earliest, the Nationals are getting the rights to the player for two years while only locking in one. It's a good bet for a lot less than I would have guessed. But then again, that's probably a good reason to think that the prognosis on his shoulder isn't that good.

One other thing: anyone else noticed what a premium the team seems to be putting on signing guys that Tom Boswell (or other minimally informed baseball fans) have heard of? Jason Marquis, Pudge Rodriguez, Willy Taveras, and now Wang. (And I still can't shake the feeling that they're about to spring a Johnny Damon signing on us...)

I guess I don't mind too much since they're basically short-term relatively cheap contracts, but it's pretty obvious that the team has made marketability a fairly high priority in their signings (as opposed to, for instance, getting the best players for the money). Again, there aren't any crippling sins here, but this isn't really a good thing for fans interested in seeing the team win more games.

Slate Podcast Discusses ZuckerGate

Stefan Fatsis, Josh Levin, and Mike Pesca discuss the Mark Zuckerman situation on their excellent sports podcast at Slate.com, Hang Up and Listen. Check it out: http://www.slate.com/id/2243238.

Willy Taveras

Gotta finish this post before the coffee finishes brewing, which is the amount of time that Willy Taveras deserves. Here are the key points:

• He's simply not a major-leaguer. Last year he hit .240 / .275 / .285. You could come up with synonyms for "awful," but really we're just looking at a minor league player--and a pretty bad one. If there's anyone to be mad at, it's Dusty Baker for giving him 400 ABs.
• Fortunately, the Nationals signed him to a minor league contract. He's the latest Norris Hopper or Corey Patterson. Unless there's a rash of injuries, we'll never see him.
• But, since Maxwell and Bernadina get hurt every year, there probably will be said rash, so it's not a terrible idea to have a plan D laying around.
• Even in the minors, there's little chance that he blocks anyone who matters. After Maxwell and Bernadina, whom I'm hoping to see in DC this year, there isn't a projectable centerfielder anywhere in the system anyway. Which is a problem worth complaining about, if you're inclined to complain.
  
• He can run and catch the ball in centerfield, which is an upgrade over what we watched for the year and half before Morgan came.
• If you're going to post comments about this, either here or elsewhere, it's spelled Taveras, not Tavares, Tavaras, or Tuvalu.

PECOTA Backpedals on the Nationals Again

The latest projections for wins-losses this season are up at Baseball Prospectus, and they've revised their Nationals projections (once a heady 82 wins) to 75 wins. That would make them the 5th worst team in baseball and last place in the NL East, two games back of the tail-spinning Mets.

The Newspaper Industry Is Run by a Bunch of Brain-Dead Morons

Not to put too fine a point on it, but isn't that the key lesson from l'affaire Zuckerman? I mean, if Mark can get readers to toss ten large in a hat for what's essentially a pig in a poke, imagine what the Post could have done with, you know, an actual advertising budget and a subscriber list that (once) numbered over a million.

Boo-hoo, the Internet makes it harder to make money in journalism. Waaaaaaa. Competition is so hard.

Guess what--provide a decent product, and people will pay. Instead, faced with competition, the newspaper industry just keeps pissing on its own product. Circulation shrinks, so they lay off reporters, and quality gets worse, and circulation shrinks, and so they lay off more reporters, and quality gets worse, and circulation shrinks more. Does it really take a business genius to figure it out?

Let me be clear that I'm not talking about the editors or the reporters or probably anyone who's ever set foot in a newsroom. The problem is the corporate hacks--most of whom have nothing but disdain for journalism and don't have any vision for the business beyond the next quarter's stock price.

And don't think this is just about the Moonie idiosyncrasies of The Washington Times, either. There's no reason that any other news outlet couldn't have been making profits off of the the consumer demand that Mark is tapping into.

If I launched a downscale general store/pharmacy in DC, would that work? Nope, CVS has squeezed very cent out of that market, thanks very much. How about a chain of cookie-cutter faux-gourmet coffee shops. Sorry, Starbucks has that market cornered. Maybe a mid-priced Mexican restaurant on the Hill? Don't think so.

But despite over 100 years of branding and resource development, the newspaper industry manages to leave so much money on the table that a guy like Mark can put up a fundraising bat on blogger, and whammo. And all due respect to Mark--he's a good reporter, but we're not exactly talking about Johnny Apple here.

I don't expect the newspaper industry to learn any lessons from this. They've been shooting themselves in the foot for years. Don't get me wrong. Some papers are better than others. Like, some papers are shooting themselves in the foot with a revolver while others are using an Uzi with armor-piercing bullets. But if there's ever been a more embarrassing episode of supposedly elite businessmen and women getting shown up as total friggin' incompetents, this is it.

Matt Capps v. Kevin Gregg

On Wednesday, in a post on the signings I wish the Nationals had been able to make this winter, I asserted that former Cubs closer Kevin Gregg is "better than Matt Capps." That drew some sharp disagreement in the comments. And while the difference is less than what was implied in the brief bullet point in the post, I stand by it 100%.

First, let's be clear. Gregg and Capps were two of the worst closers in baseball not named "Hanrahan" in 2009. Among relievers with at least 15 saves last year:

• Capps was 2nd worst (Brad Lidge) in win probability added at -2.83. That means the team would have won 2.83 more games if they had gotten an average performance in Capps' innings. Gregg was 3rd worst at -1.04. In fact, Capps was 2nd worst of any reliever in baseball in this crucial stat. (Kyle Farnsworth was 3rd at -2.15, followed by Luis Ayala at -2.13, if you're interested.)
  
• Capps was worst in the league in opposing hitters OPS+ at 146. Gregg was 6th worst at 97.
• Capps was 2nd worst (Brad Lidge) in ERA+ at 71, while Gregg was 4th worst at 95.
• Capps was 2nd worst in the percent of inherited runners allowed to score: 57%. Gregg was tied for 13th best at 18%.

Now, in fairness, Gregg and especially Capps had down years in 2009. But before anyone goes bonkers making the case for either of these guys, we need to acknowledge that the near-term history for both of them is pretty ghastly.

The key question is which of these one-year contract recipients (read: the age difference doesn't really matter) can we expect to be better in 2010. Let's start by looking at the projection systems. These aren't gospel, but they have a reasonable track record, and if one player is clearly better than the other, there's usually a consensus:

CHONE
Gregg (3.90 ERA, 67 IP)
Capps (3.63, 57)

Marcel
Gregg (4.09, 66)
Capps (4.19, 58)

PECOTA
Gregg (3.93, 65)
Capps (3.58, 65)

Bill James
Gregg (3.60, 65)
Capps (3.47, 57)

ZIPs
Gregg (4.50, 70)
Capps (3.88, 65)

Other than ZIPs, they're pretty close across the board. Marcel likes Gregg better, ZIPs and PECOTA likes Capps, and CHONE and Bill James expect Capps to have a lower ERA in fewer innings, which is close to a wash. But if all you had was these numbers, you'd give a slight edge to Capps.

Still, I like Gregg better for a few reasons. First, there's health. Capps missed a bunch of time at the end of 2008 with throwing shoulder issues, which would be a flag in any case, but considering his heavy workload in '07 and '08, plus his terrible '09, the flags are even bigger and redder for me. Gregg's had a balky knee, but there's nothing worse for a pitcher than an achy shoulder.

Second, Capps is far more hittable. His career strikeout rate is 18.6%, compared to 23.8% in 2009 and 21.3% career for Gregg. No, Ks aren't everything, but over the long haul I have a lot more confidence in guys who can miss bats than guys who can't.

Third, there are the splits. Gregg has a slight lefty-righty split, but nothing unusual. Capps on the other hand gets massacred by lefties. Opposing managers seem to have figured this out, as 2009 was the first season of his career that he saw more lefties than righties. And I vaguely recall some pretty good left-handed hitters in the NL East.

Finally, Gregg's just had success over a longer period of time. Capps was outstanding for two years and terrible for one. Until last year, Gregg had been a pretty useful guy for basically five seasons.

Don't get me wrong--I applauded the Capps signing. Given then need and the cost, I thought it was a reasonable move. But I still think the Nationals are 1-2 solid relievers from having a decently below-average group, and I think they need to add at least one more reliable bullpen arm. Gregg would have been as solid a choice as anyone left out there now.

Re-posting the Mark-Brian-Steven Podcast

For folks who missed it, here's the download to last week's Natmosphere in your Ear podcast, which started with, "so Mark, what's your plan?" The conversation went on for 20 minutes or so after we shut off the taping, and most of what you've seen from the Nat-Roots bloggers since then is what we discussed in that conversation. It's a good listen regardless, touching on the Nationals' bullpen and middle infield situations. But given what's happened since, it's just kind of incredible to think we recorded this just 6 days ago.

Again, here's the link to the podcast, and, as always be sure to subscribe on I-Tunes or the RSS feed while you're there.

Good Signings the Nationals Didn't Make

It's been another kind free agent market for bargain-hunters this winter. As I noted earlier this week--there are still some useful players to be had. But looking back, there have been several excellent value deals the Nationals didn't make. Here's my "damn, why didn't the Nationals do that" list:

• Erik Bedard (1 year, $1.5m plus incentives up to $7m): Chances are, Bedard is broken and will never be fixed. But given the upside and the low risk, this is a shockingly good deal for Seattle. Again, Jack Z. runs circles around the competition.
• Greg Zaun (1 year, $2.175m): Better than Pudge for less.
• Yorvit Torrealba (1 year, $1.25m): Even more better than Pudge for half.
• Omar Vizquel (1 year, $1.375m): Still a fantastic gloveman. Would have been the guy to upgrade the middle infield defense for cheap, and we know he'd be fine sharing playing time with a prospect 20 years his younger, since that's what he did in Texas last year with Elvis Andrus.
• Jon Garland (1 year, $5.3m): A tad pricey for what he is, but that's just a comment on how far the market has fallen. He made over $36 million the four years before that, and it's not like he's in decline. Besides, any one-year deal for a solid 200-innings pitcher is a good value.
• Carl Pavano (1 year, $7m): Like Garland, this isn't really a big bargain, but it's a fair deal for a pitcher who would have filled in nicely for what the Nationals need.
• Justin Duchscherer (1 year, $2m): Maybe he wasn't willing to leave Oakland, and he's made of glass, but this is a great price for any pitcher with his upside.
• Khalil Greene (1 year, $750k): Price is right, and he'd make a good utility infielder, and he's only two years removed from a 27-HR season in Petco. In the meantime, he completely lost control of the strike zone, but it's not hard to imagine him winning CBOY and outplaying everyone in the Nationals' middle infield.
• Kevin Gregg (1 year, $2.75m): Better, cheaper than Matt Capps. Certainly better than Bruney, Walker, or (massive understatement alert) Eddie Guardado.
• Rich Harden (1 year, $7.5m): Another guy who's made of glass, but he's got overpowering strikeout stuff and is a solid risk-reward bet at this price. If nothing else, he'd be a lot more fun to watch pitch than J.D. Martin.
• Randy Winn (1 year, $2m): Still a very good defensive outfielder. Wouldn't fit on the Nationals roster at the moment, but if Justin Maxwell gets hurt again, or Willingham is traded, or Rizzo decides to banish Dukes again, Winn would be handy at least as a fourth outfielder.
• Doug Davis (1 year, $5.25m): Junkballer, not a bargain exactly, but another guy who would have given the Nationals a good veteran presence for a very reasonable price.
• Ryan Garko (1 year, $550k): Just an absolute steal for the M's at this price. He's a fine fielder, and he's a lefty-killer at the plate. Garko would have been a very nice fit as Dunn's backup at first, or a right-handed platoon partner (for let's say Russell Branyan?) if Willingham or Dunn were traded. BTW, do I love Jack Z.? Yes, I love him. I luff him. I lurve him. I'm so jealous of Seattle that I ask for "drip" when I order coffee.
• Tim Redding (minor league): I wouldn't want him in my top 5 on the depth chart, but he's certainly worth an invite to camp. I can't really see that he's lost much if anything since 2008.

Goal Reached--Time for a New Goal?

Congratulations to Mark Zuckerman for raising the $5,000 he needs to cover the Nationals spring training in just over 24 hours.

So... what now? I vote for Mark to increase his goal to $50k and stay on through the end of the season.

What do you say Zuckerman? You man enough to aim higher?

• PS Hey Preston--you feeling stupid enough yet? Sure. Cut the sports page. There's no market for that.
  

We Need a Closer

Mark's at 92% of his goal and just $500 short of his goal. It's really exciting. But as we all learned over and over and over last season, just because we're ahead going into the bottom of the ninth doesn't mean we're going to win.

To finish the job, we need a closer. We need someone to step up and put us over the top.

Don't take this victory for granted. Remember Kip Wells. Give. To. Mark. Now.

Great News! We're Half Way There!

After just 24 hours, former Washington Times reporter Mark Zuckerman is already more than half way to the $5,000 bucks he needs to go to Viera and cover the Nationals during Spring Training.

After years of listening to people go on about how great the Cardinals fans are, and of course Red Sox Nation, and then there's the diehardcubsfans (all-one-word)... Well, forget that. We're putting our money where our mouths are.

But we can't rest on our laurels. We all learned in 2005 that being in first place at the half-way point can just be the first step to another last place finish. And if you don't give, and Mark falls short, that means you're like the Junior Spivey of this thing. Do your part. Don't be Junior Spivey. Click here to give:

http://www.chipin.com/contribute/id/3aad34cc7a988fdb

Now, I know what some of you are thinking. The Post is going to cover spring training. Why do I need this? Some readers may be fans of other teams, checking this out after hearing about it on Fangraphs or Keith Law's Twitter feed or the Stefan Fatsis Facebook page. What do you care about the latest in the epic J.D. Martin v. Shawn Estes battle for the 5th starter spot on the worst team in baseball?

Let's back up and explain what's really going on here. Local papers aren't going through some temporary lull in one team's coverage. Newspapers in America are dying, especially the ones not called The New York Times or The Wall Street Journal, and it's only going to get worse.

The same reason that the Post has cut the Nationals beat to a thin dangling thread is the same reason that coverage of city halls has been basically phased out at daily papers across the nation. Remember season five of The Wire? The one about the Baltimore Sun? And then McNulty fakes all those homeless murders, but Carcetti covers it up, and then Omar gets it from the little kid, and Bubbles finally cleans up his act? Oh man, that shit was tight.

Anyway, the point is that if you think coverage of the Nationals is bad now, it's only getting worse. Wait till the Post starts running only AP copy for 162 gamers a year. Don't think that's coming? You're wrong. You'll miss even that much when Kaplan finally hires their Preston Moon and decides it's time to cut the entire paper to down to what you get in those Washington Post "Express" handouts all over the floor on the Metro.

So if you want quality coverage of the teams you care about, you better show it. Once the papers are gone, it's going to be a long road back. Click here to kick in your part:

http://www.chipin.com/contribute/id/3aad34cc7a988fdb

Again, thanks for everything.

P.S. If you're not compelled by my pitch, check out these:

• Fangraphs: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/independent-beat-writing/
• Baseball Musings: http://baseballmusings.com/?p=46411
• NFA: http://natsfarm.com/2010/02/08/help-send-mark-to-viera/
• NTP: http://nats3play.blogspot.com/2010/02/send-blogger-to-camp.html
• NNN: http://natsnewsnetwork.blogspot.com/2010/02/sending-zuckerman-to-florida.html
• NFL: http://natslooser.blogspot.com/2010/02/screw-mark-send-me-to-florida.html

If You Care about the Nationals, Please Read this Post Now

Mark Zuckerman, the excellent Nationals beat writer recently laid off by The Washington Times, is asking for our help to send him to Viera to cover the Nationals this spring training on his new site, Nats Insider. Mark is generously saying all he needs is a measly $5,000 to cover the team in spring training for six weeks.

But he needs our help to get it done. If you have enough disposable income to pay $7 for a lousy beer at Nationals Park, you have enough to kick in at least $100. Click here to give now and prove that you aren't a lousy cheap bum like Ted Lerner:

http://www.chipin.com/contribute/id/3aad34cc7a988fdb

Or, check out Mark's post here and give from the link on his page (which is the same).

Nationals fans NEED Mark in Viera. The Nationals are on the verge of becoming the first team in MLB ever to have no independent, full-time reporters covering the team. All the MASN TV and radio guys work for the team. Bill Ladson works for the team. Chico Harlan, god bless him, is going to chew his arm off if the Post doesn't take him off the Nationals beat soon. And it's been reported that the Post won't hire from outside because of budget cuts dictated by corporate higher ups, so we're seriously looking at a season with one WaPo paid intern total covering the team.

For average fans who just want some basic coverage of the team, nevermind an occasional scoop, this is really a crisis situation.

Why did it take a week for anyone to report that Chris Duncan had been signed? Why doesn't anyone at the Post have more than 20 months of perspective on the history of this team? (Boswell doesn't count, since he covers the stadium, not the team.) Why was the Smiley Gonzalez story missed for so long? Why are 90% of the news stories covering the team this winter totally fact-less speculation about how the team is "interested" in this guy or that guy whom we never hear about again?

And it's not just the lack of quality content that we're talking about. With no one covering the team in an independent, professional way, Kasten and Lerner will just keep doing what they're doing--putting out a crappy product and pocketing the revenue-sharing money and the revenue from their taxpayer-funded cash cow stadium. If the Nationals are ever going to get better, we need a watchdog media to keep them honest.

It's time for Nationals fans to stop complaining about the coverage of the team and step up. Mark is basically volunteering to do the incredibly hard work of a full-time beat reporter for below cost. He's a proven professional, and you know you're going to get a quality product (unlike all the other money we as fans spend on the Nationals).

Now, if you're assuming that someone else is going to pay, and Mark's going to do this anyway, you're WRONG. I've spoken to Mark about this, and I promise you, if we don't kick in the $5,000, he's not going, and we're going to be stuck with Hamburgler Ladson and Lame Duck Chico.

But really, just think, if every person who comes to FJB today kicks in JUST TENS DOLLARS, he'll hit his goal today.

But guess what--that's not happening. Because most people ARE cheaper than Ted Lerner. Most people are free-loaders. Don't be one of them. And Mark knows who's given and who hasn't, so all you regular commenters, don't think you can pretend you gave and get away with lying. JayBee, ABM, all y'all... we'll know if you're the deadbeat.

So take a second and donate now. Please. As fans, we desperately want more reporting on this team, and it's clear we're not going to get it unless we step up. Click here now:

http://www.chipin.com/contribute/id/3aad34cc7a988fdb

Thanks.

Free Agents: Who's Left?

There are just twelve days until pitchers and catchers report, but it's not too late for Mike Rizzo to make the 2010 Nationals better. Such useful contributors as Odalis Perez, Joe Beimel, and Ronnie Belliard have been added during Spring Training over the past few years. Here's a look at some of the guys still looking for work who might be able to help the Nationals.

• Russell Branyan

The 34-year-old Branyan was reportedly looking for a three-year deal in the neighborhood of $20 million, which explains why he's still looking for work. At this point, he'd do well to get a one-year deal in the neighborhood of $5 million.

Branyan would be an excellent fit on the Nationals' current roster, giving them a true first baseman, backup to Ryan Zimmerman, and a left-handed thumper whom they could platoon with Elijah Dukes and Josh Willingham by sliding Adam Dunn back and forth between first base and the outfield. And in the event that the Nationals find a trading partner for Willingham or Rizzo finally does away with Dukes (as he's clearly always intended to), they'll need someone.

Branyan has always had great power and patience, and for years he's been underrated by GMs paying too much attention to his strikeouts. Last year, finally given a full time job by Jack "would have been a better choice than Rizzo" Zduriencik, Branyan pummeled righties to the tune of .267 / .363 / .542. He faded in the second half, but based on his overall track record, there's no reason to think he won't repeat his overall 2009 line this year.

• Johnny Damon

Even a month ago, this would have seemed crazy. Why would Johnny Damon come to DC, and where would the Nationals play him?

Well, Damon overestimated the market for his services (badly) and now he's in a position where he might have to just take what he can get. I've even heard he might just retire if no one offers him a starting job, which seems crazy. As for the second part, he'd be the second best player on the team on day one, so make room. He walks, he hits for power, some of the metrics say he declined last year in the field and he can't throw, but I'll argue with anyone who doubts he'd be a significant upgrade over Willingham or Dunn in left. He could be flipped for prospects at mid-year or would be an automatic type-A free agent going into 2011.

I wouldn't want them to block Dukes, but Rizzo's already probably decided to non-tender Dukes after next year anyway. Regardless, assuming Damon can be had on a discounted one-year contract between $5 and $7 million, just make room. Trade Dunn. Trade Willingham. Whatever. This would be a massive bargain to make the team better, so just do it.

• Braden Looper

The Nationals need at least one more veteran starting pitcher to take pressure off the youngsters they need to break in over the next year or three. While I worry about guys like Adam Kennedy and Willingham blocking young position players, I worry even more about young pitchers being over-exposed. When pitchers are asked to throw too many innings, the risk of injury goes way up. And if you're going to protect a Strasburg or a Stammen, someone else needs to provide the innings. You can't just make the bullpen throw 3-4 innings every night.

Looper is one of the few remaining pitchers who may be able to fill that need. He basically has two key selling points: 393.6 innings over the last two years, and he'll be cheap. But he's extremely hittable, and the team will lose most of the games he starts. Still that's better than reading about Stephen Strasburg going down to Birmingham after pitching through pain a la Jordan Zimmermann.

• Jarrod Washburn

Washburn is another guy who misread the demand for his services and now risks having to just take what he can get. He's been saying all winter that he only wanted to pitch for certain teams. The Twins, thought to be one of those teams, offered a one-year, $5 million contract, and he turned it down. Now they don't need him, and Washburn is making noise about retiring, probably as a negotiating ploy since there's apparently no market for him at the price he wants. The fact is that he's a good left-handed pitcher who can be counted on for 150-170 innings with an ERA below 4.50. Moving to the easier league for the first time, he might be better than that.

• Chien-Ming Wang

The big question is his health. Over the last two years, his velocity has declined, his walks have gone up, and he's missed a bunch of time. He's coming off surgery for a torn shoulder capsule, which I've never heard of, but it sounds terrible. But if he can come back close to the guy he was, he's a very useful pitcher. He's never struck anyone out, but he pounds the zone with groundballs and would benefit from the move to the easier league. Still, this is a definite buyer-beware situation, and he's anything but the solution to the innings need.

• Joe Beimel

Most people assume the Nationals' bullpen will be better this year than last year. I agree with that, but when measuring how much better, you have to factor in the loss of one of the most valuable relievers on the team last season, Joe Beimel. I don't know who is going to give the Nationals the 39.2 innings of 3.40 ERA relief work Beimel did before being traded to Colorado.

• Kiko Calero

Calero was extremely effective for Florida last year, giving them 60 inning with a 1.35 ERA. He's always walked too many and had extreme flyball tendencies, but when you K 10.35 per 9 innings, you can get away with that.

• Chan Ho Park

Park has to been one of the more underrated pitchers in baseball over the last few years, owing to the fact that he bombed after signing a big contract in Texas eight years ago. He allowed a sparkling .231 / .296 / .280 line as a reliever last year, and with his strong groundball rates and 2.20 K:BB ratio over the last two seasons, he'd rank as the third or fourth best starter on the team right now. He might not leave Philly to relieve, but he'd help the Nationals either in the rotation or bullpen.

• Russ Springer

He's old as dirt, but last year at age 41 he posted the best K:BB ratio of his career--3.41. He's another big-time flyball pitcher, but assuming he doesn't finally hit the career wall, he'd be a quality add.

How I Choose whom to Root for in the Super Bowl

Assuming my Packers aren't in it, here are the factors I weigh, in descending order of importance:

1. Root against the Vikings or the Bears, if they're in it.
2. If I'm watching with a friend, and they really care, side with them.
3. Root for teams that play outdoors over dome teams.
4. Root against teams that have moved.
5. Root for historic teams over expansion franchises.
6. Root for underdogs.
7. Any wild card factors (like Bill Belichik's a big cheater).
8. As a final tie-breaker, I look at the congressional delegation.

To get a feel for it, over the last few years, I've rooted for the Steelers, Giants, Colts, Steelers, Eagles, Patriots, Raiders, and Patriots.

But this year is a toughie. I'm watching alone. Both teams play indoors. The Colts moved, but then again the Saints are an expansion team famously created as a result of a backroom deal between Louisiana congressman Hale Boggs and Pete Roselle, when there were lots of other cities who would have wanted a team at the same time. So that all kind of cancels itself out for me. And neither team strikes me as much of an underdog--the teams seem pretty evenly matched.

There are some wild-card factors this year. You have the obnoxious Manning family factor, but that's counted against both sides. I guess everyone's rooting for New Orleans because they still feel bad about Hurricane Katrina, and I respect that. But honestly, New Orleans is an awfully cool city, and Indianapolis, well... let's just say I don't feel that bad for the people of New Orleans.

So that brings us to the final tie-breaker, the congressional delegations. But damned if there weren't two more similar delegations than Indiana and Louisiana. Melancon = Hill. Scalise, Fleming, Cassidy, Boustany = Souder, Buyer, Pence, Burton. Bayh = Landrieu. Peter Visclosky's got an influence-peddling scandal, but then there are David Vitter's prostitutes. Andre Carson's one of only two Muslims in Congress, which is kind of interesting, but Joe Cao's the only Vietnamese. Of course, there's the overwhelming leftover stink of Dollar Bill Jefferson, though I guess it's not fair to still hold that against the nice people of New Orleans. And then there's Dick Lugar. He's a conservative Republican, and as a big ol' liberal, I wouldn't vote for him. But I have to admit he seems like a pretty sincere, hard-working, respected guy. I can't bring myself to make him the deciding factor either way.

After all that, I'm still torn. I don't know what to do. But since the game started 30 minutes ago, I guess I better decide. So I'm going with the classic, tried and true way of choosing a rooting interest when you really have no other reason to care: pick the team with the best colors. The Colts' classic blue and white clearly beats the snot out of the Saints' godawful black and puke, so there it is. Go Colts!

Updated Nationals Wins Above Replacement Projection

All the comings and goings, and the Nationals still project to... 74 wins, same as last time. Just not enough impact from any of these guys, though I think there's less potential for cratering from this group.

Also, for those interested in the details, I have updated the projection to use CHONE across the board. Last time I used Bill James, because that was the only one out. In the past I've like CHONE for hitters and PECOTA for pitchers, but I'm not convinced that PECOTA has ironed out all their bugs.

Here are the hitters:

Pos	Name	PT	wOBA	FRAA	WAR
C	Jesus Flores	60%	0.324	0	1.70
C	Ivan Rodriguez	40%	0.29	0	0.31
1B	Adam Dunn	65%	0.378	-8.43	1.79
1B	Mike Morse	35%	0.343	0.34	0.53
2B	Adam Kennedy	75%	0.313	1.76	1.00
2B	Willie Harris	25%	0.328	-1.06	0.49
SS	Cristian Guzman	75%	0.316	-1.95	1.24
SS	Ian Desmond	25%	0.324	-4.51	0.47
3B	Ryan Zimmerman	85%	0.379	10.09	5.22
3B	Ian Desmond	15%	0.324	0	0.27
RF	Elijah Dukes	80%	0.351	1.91	2.12
RF	Mike Morse	20%	0.343	-0.29	0.39
CF	Nyjer Morgan	85%	0.321	8.48	2.11
CF	Willie Harris	15%	0.328	-0.56	0.30
LF	Josh Willingham	80%	0.361	-6	2.77
LF	Adam Dunn	20%	0.378	-10.79	0.60
	Total				21.32

And the pitchers:

		IP	FIP	WAR
SP	Jason Marquis	180	4.46	2.06
SP	John Lannan	170	4.82	1.27
SP	Craig Stammen	130	4.96	0.77
SP	Garrett Mock	130	4.28	1.74
SP	J.D. Martin	120	4.77	0.96
SP	Scott Olsen	90	5.12	0.38
SP	Ross Detwiler	90	4.44	1.05
SP	Stephen Strasburg	40	4.18	0.58
RP	Matt Capps	65	3.82	0.49
RP	Brian Bruney	50	4.35	0.08
RP	Tyler Clippard	65	4.2	0.21
RP	Tyler Walker	50	4.29	0.12
RP	Sean Burnett	55	4.63	-0.08
RP	Jason Bergmann	70	4.47	0.02
RP	Miguel Batista	30	4.86	-0.12
RP	Doug Slaten	40	4.07	0.19
RP	Collin Balester	50	5.06	-0.31
RP	Drew Storen	20	5.88	-0.30
	Total	1445		9.12

Another Kennedy Comes to Washington

Nope, it's not Joe, not Caroline, not Maria or Mark Shriver, and he sure as shooting isn't a senator from the Great "we got our health care, screw the rest of y'all" Commonwealth of Red Sox Nation.

It's Adam Kennedy! Kennedy's a 34-year-old second-baseman who played last year with Oakland after a two-year injury-plagued stint in St. Louis. He's signed for one year and $1.5 million with a $2 million team option for 2011. He doesn't strike out much, but he also doesn't have much power, and doesn't walk. He once played a pretty good second base, but the Nationals should expect below-average or worse. Kind of Cristian Guzman without the switch-hitting or 6-year, $32 million price tag.

Here are my thoughts, in no particular order:

• Regardless of what you think of Guzman and Desmond, the Nationals needed another middle infielder. There's at least an 80% chance that one of the two of them would miss some extended time at some point, and you can't go into a major league season with Eric Bruntlett as your plan B. And there's probably a 15% chance that both of them would go down, either due to injury or poor performance. And in that case the middle infield would be what? A rotation of Bruntlett, Willie Harris, and Alberto Gonzalez, I guess. That's what 105 losses looks like.
• This is a good value signing. The Fangraphs system (which isn't gospel, but is a solid benchmark) estimated Kennedy's value in 2009 at 1.7 wins above replacement and $7.2 million last season, and so even with a normal decline in productivity for his age, he should provide $1.5 million or more, barring injury.
• One key question is what this means for Ian Desmond. I don't think it's good for his development to just throw him into the deep end without a life jacket. But I also don't want him blocked. It's not the end of the world if Desmond starts the season in AAA. But unless the Nationals shock everyone and are playing above-.500 ball behind break-out seasons by Guzman and Kennedy, he needs to be playing every day at shortstop by June 1.
• Neither Kennedy nor Guzman will ever be compared to Cal Ripken in terms of durability. So even if the team wanted to keep Desmond out of the lineup all year (and there's no reason to think they do), that probably wouldn't happen.
• Going into the off-season Mike Rizzo said his goal was to upgrade the middle-infield defense. That was a really good idea, given the stock-piling of groundballers he's done and the importance of developing young pitchers like Stephen Strasburg, Ross Detwiler, Drew Storen, Aaron Thompson, etc., etc. However, while the organizational depth chart is better than it was in September, he's failed on the goal of upgrading the defense. Guzman will still be Guzman (minus whatever effect age has), and Kennedy hasn't been an above-average second baseman since he left Orange County.
  
• The most important thing for Desmond's development isn't really the fielding. Seems pretty clear that he is what he is--he'll make to many errors, but he'll make up those error runs and maybe more with above-average range and the cannon arm. The question is whether the bat will play at higher levels. His power emerged as a major tool last season, and if his strike-zone discipline can develop against big league pitching, he could become a consistent near-all star player with 20+ homers and average on-base skills to go with average defense at a premium fielding position--think Jhonny Peralta or Yunel Escobar, but with enough athleticism to keep doing it into his 30s. There's a lot of value in a guy like that, but to get there, he needs at least 450 PAs this year.
• I hate hate hate the idea of making Desmond a super-utility guy this year. Look, if he fails to make the jump I describe above, and the best you can get from him is a Willie Harris-type, fine. So be it. There's value in that too. But to make him learn a new position (or three) at the same time that he's trying to learn how to keep himself out of pitchers' counts against major league arms--well, how'd that work with Lastings Milledge and Elijah Dukes?
• Orlando Hudson is better than Adam Kennedy, but not that much better. And with the amount of money you'd have sunk into Hudson and Guzman, it would be hard NOT to block Desmond. Not only am I not sad about losing Hudson, this is actually the better move for the Nationals. Now if they'd only used some of that money to go out and gotten another starting pitcher like Aroldis Chapman, Carl Pavano, Jon Garland, Erik Bedard, Ben Sheets...