Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: AdamKilgoreWP and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Sports and Redskins  |  RSS

Nats stand pat at trade deadline

Official word is in: The Nationals have held onto everyone on their roster.

Take a deep breath.

The latest rumblings - and this stuff got wild fast - is that there may have been some talk of a three-way deal involving the Nationals, Mets and Diamondbacks, with Cordero likely going to the Mets.

As we said earlier, Mets had offered Philip Humber. Nats wouldn't do it one-for-one, a late gasp to get Arizona involved, not sure of the players there.

All right, I'm going down to talk to everyone and will give you a briefing in an hour or two. Thanks for clicking refresh throughout the day.

By Barry Svrluga  |  July 31, 2007; 4:04 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Here come the Diamondbacks
Next: No-trade postmortem: Bowden explains

Comments

suspense.....

Posted by: jon | July 31, 2007 4:05 PM | Report abuse

wack

Posted by: jason | July 31, 2007 4:06 PM | Report abuse

what if they're a minute late??

Posted by: Wigi | July 31, 2007 4:07 PM | Report abuse

thanks, Barry. we're standing by . .

Posted by: lowcountrynatsfan | July 31, 2007 4:07 PM | Report abuse

That's prolly good.

Is there a game tonight?

Posted by: Wigi | July 31, 2007 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Chico and Mock to NYM for Lastings Milledge to Arizona for Livan Hernandez.

Jim Bowden is even steven...

Posted by: estuartj | July 31, 2007 4:08 PM | Report abuse

tick......tick.......tick......

Posted by: tomterp | July 31, 2007 4:08 PM | Report abuse

OK - let's play ball!

Posted by: lowcountrynatsfan | July 31, 2007 4:08 PM | Report abuse

rats ....

.... I didn't really want to give up anybody, but I wanted a trade .... gotta play to win ....

Posted by: NatBisquit | July 31, 2007 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Hail to the Chief.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2007 4:09 PM | Report abuse

"Teh Plan" seems to have morhped into avoiding trading for young talent and instead signing every 35 year old re-tread we can find.

Posted by: Bowden's Leather Pants | July 31, 2007 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Awesome, another failed opportunity. Maybe Chad will bend his brim in delight...

Posted by: Nick715 | July 31, 2007 4:10 PM | Report abuse

No Barry, thank you for your continuous updating all day.

"Thanks for clicking refresh throughout the day."

Posted by: Greg | July 31, 2007 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Can Bowden trade Church through Waivers?

What day do post-season rosters finalize?

Posted by: estuartj | July 31, 2007 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Looks like the real plan is to keep a last place team together...which makes sense - now I say they reward Chad with a huge multi-year deal because that's the logic that follows...

Posted by: Nick715 | July 31, 2007 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Barry:

Thanks for your hard work... I may not buy the $.35 paper, but I know everything there is to know about HP products... and I am happy to wade through the ads to read your updates.

Posted by: Wigi | July 31, 2007 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Looks like the real plan is to keep a last place team together, no matter what is offered to break it up...which makes sense...or not, whatever...

Posted by: Nick715 | July 31, 2007 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Looks like the real plan is to keep a last place team together, no matter what is offered to break it up...which makes sense...or not, whatever...

Posted by: Nick715 | July 31, 2007 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Maybe the real deadline is 4pm pst...huh, its not...shucks, as all also rans say...wait til next year.

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | July 31, 2007 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Two years in a row no trades at the trade deadline. Do I know what I am doing or what? Yes, it really does take two to tango.

Posted by: Trader Jim | July 31, 2007 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Computer glitches are fun, my bad

Posted by: Nick715 | July 31, 2007 4:16 PM | Report abuse

OK out of towners....log onto wtem.com and click listen live to hear JimBo at 4:30 pm...

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | July 31, 2007 4:16 PM | Report abuse

We'll welcome you back with open arms, Chief.

Posted by: Chief's moms | July 31, 2007 4:18 PM | Report abuse

For someone with Bowden's reputation, you'd think he'd make a deal for the sake of doing it... but he didn't.

Good for him... good for us... we still have one of the best bullpens in baseball... and we will in April, too.

Posted by: Wigi | July 31, 2007 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Should have moved Chad for some prospects. Bowden needs to stop overvalueing his own players. What does a good closer do for a last place team??

Posted by: Jim | July 31, 2007 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the tip SC

Posted by: lowcountrynatsfan | July 31, 2007 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome back your 2007 Nationals for your 2008 season.

How does Jim Bowden have a job? HOW?

Posted by: jflansburgh | July 31, 2007 4:20 PM | Report abuse

I hope we get some insight into what the Plan is now from Barry.....Think back to Spring Training.....some radical right turns since then and I would think it would be a good time to dig some on what happened that caused such a 180 in direction over 4 months and 60 loses.

Posted by: JayB | July 31, 2007 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Should fit perfectly in Philly:
Phillies Obtain Julio Mateo
The Phillies are attempting to corner the market on scumbags. Today, they acquired 28 year-old reliever and wife beater/biter Julio Mateo from the Mariners.
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/
Nice.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2007 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Myers ought to be able to give him a few pointers on that front...

Posted by: natsfan1a | July 31, 2007 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Nick brightly states the obvious fact, "Looks like the real plan is to keep a last place team together...which makes sense - now I say they reward Chad with a huge multi-year deal because that's the logic that follows..."

I'm not very bright, though. I would have said the Plan involves finding pieces and keeping them instead of trading them all away for an ever-hoped for, but never arriving future.

Posted by: Section 506 (After moving) | July 31, 2007 4:24 PM | Report abuse

u b welcome low country...what city/town in SC u in??

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | July 31, 2007 4:26 PM | Report abuse

"Any chance of a three-way trade between Boston, Texas and DC, i.e. Gagne comes to DC, Texas gets whoever Boston was offering, and Boston gets Cordero/Rauch?

Posted by: Juan-John | July 31, 2007 02:42 PM "

----

You mean I was close to being right?!? Dang, shoulda gone out and bought a lottery ticket...

Posted by: Juan-John | July 31, 2007 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Chad has a muliti-year in pocket.

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | July 31, 2007 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Barry,

What I would love to know from your sources and your opinion please........If Rizzo was the GM how many of these deals could have gotten done. The question is has Jimbo's personality poisoned the opportunity for Nats to find true prospects?

Posted by: JayB | July 31, 2007 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the tip.

-----

OK out of towners....log onto wtem.com and click listen live to hear JimBo at 4:30 pm...

Posted by: John in Mpls | July 31, 2007 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Problem is Cordero, as much as I like him, should have been traded after the 2005 season for max value!

Posted by: John R | July 31, 2007 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Problem is Cordero, as much as I like him, should have been traded after the 2005 season for max value!

Posted by: John R | July 31, 2007 4:32 PM | Report abuse

So Bowden's masterplan is to gather as many fat veterans as possible, lock them up for stupid deals, and then refuse to trade for starting pitching prospects at the AAA level?

His contract is up after this year, right?

Posted by: Jon (DC) | July 31, 2007 4:33 PM | Report abuse

506 gets In Your Face: "I'm not very bright, though. I would have said the Plan involves finding pieces and keeping them instead of trading them all away for an ever-hoped for, but never arriving future."

I might've said 'reflexively' trading them all away. (Or I might not.)

But when I say "DC attitude," that's what I'm talking about. Go on with your bad self, 506.

Posted by: Hendo | July 31, 2007 4:34 PM | Report abuse

I just don't understand this front office anymore. I'm holding off on buying any tickets for next season. Could be plenty of walk ups available.

Posted by: HeadScratcher | July 31, 2007 4:34 PM | Report abuse

The millennium is now: Czabe, on 980, just used the pronoun "we" in referring to the Nats.

Bowden's on now and they're talking phone calls.

Posted by: Hendo | July 31, 2007 4:36 PM | Report abuse

"The Phillies are attempting to corner the market on scumbags."

But I thought Barry just said the Nationals kept Dmitri Young...

Posted by: o rly | July 31, 2007 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Orangeburg

Posted by: lowcountrynatsfan | July 31, 2007 4:40 PM | Report abuse

@ Jon (DC):

"[Bowden's] contract is up after this year, right?"

Exactly. So we should expect him to be resigned for a two-year extension at the first available opportunity.

Posted by: jflansburgh | July 31, 2007 4:44 PM | Report abuse

smoke clears, nats stand pat, plenty jeers and cheers, and thats that.

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | July 31, 2007 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Oh yeah, we also welcome the Wookie back with open arms.

Posted by: Rauch's moms | July 31, 2007 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Bowden is a lame duck. Get rid of him.

Posted by: Kevin | July 31, 2007 4:46 PM | Report abuse

double dactyl us??

---

smoke clears, nats stand pat, plenty jeers and cheers, and thats that.

Posted by: natsfan1a | July 31, 2007 4:46 PM | Report abuse

JFlansburgh = John Flansburgh?

Inquiring alternative music nerds want to know.

Posted by: John in Mpls | July 31, 2007 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Beaufort

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | July 31, 2007 4:47 PM | Report abuse

... hey lookit NatBisquit, Nick715 and all you guys, I like trades as much as the next person. I mean, they invlove getting to know new players; whether the new guys will be any good in various circumstances; whether they'll let slip with some dissing remark about r=the fans, or their old team. It's all grist for the fan-mill.

... but today we have to ask ourselves if the team is better or worse off because of the NO trades. Or is staying the same another way of not getting worse. That is my view, conservative old curmudgeon that I am. I'd rather see the same familiar names and faces than 1/ see the new guys fail us, and 2/ see our old guys shoot up like rockets for someone else. I guess I'm selfish and greedy that way.

... the way to build a solid successful team is not to get all antsy at trading deadlines, but to maintain a steady course when all those around you are running about half-cocked.

... and on that note, I give Jim and Stan full marks. They were active in their passivity, and that's no mean feat.

Posted by: natscan reduxit | July 31, 2007 4:47 PM | Report abuse

chad is a good closer. not more than that. to overvalue him just to keep a bad team together is crazy. HUMBER for CORDERO and a lower A prospect should have been done. this is a guy in cordero whose WHIP is very high and his save chances very bad 21/28. on pace to blow 11-13 saves this year. imagine if this was a good team.

Posted by: the guy | July 31, 2007 4:48 PM | Report abuse

I kinda like having a bullpen that gives us a great chance of winning a game if we can get to the 6th/7th with a lead. If the Nats couldn't get something exceptional for Cordero/Rauch, then they did exactly what they should have -- nothing.

We already have enough mid-level players.

Posted by: joebleux | July 31, 2007 4:48 PM | Report abuse

i am so sick of everyone armchair GMing. has anyone here actually played baseball? support the local team and stop second guessing everything. as important as you think you are, the possibility that you do not know everything is quite high.

i agree with 506 and Hendos "DC Attitude".

Posted by: theraph | July 31, 2007 4:48 PM | Report abuse

How is Stan letting Bowden continue to operate this team this way? Its going BACKWARDS!!!!SDRAWKCAB

Posted by: Andrew Stebbins | July 31, 2007 4:49 PM | Report abuse

... now that the clamour and much ado about nothing is over, I'll re-pose my question. Of the last 57 games left this season, what record will the Nats achieve? I say 24 wins and 33 losses.

Posted by: natscan reduxit | July 31, 2007 4:49 PM | Report abuse

I'm good with the DC 'tude, too.

Posted by: natsfan1a | July 31, 2007 4:51 PM | Report abuse

What did Bowden say? Or can I guess?

Posted by: Kevin | July 31, 2007 4:51 PM | Report abuse

I would have liked to see a deal go down, especially to recieve the likes of Milledge. However, you can only make a trade if you think you are getting the right price. If Bowden didn't think he was getting enough in return for Rauch and/or Cordero (and from all accounts he wasn't), then he can't make a trade. Making trades for the sole purpose of living up to everyone's expectations (aka The Plan) is just plain stupid. I applaud Bowden for standing firm.

I am also interested to hear anyone's thoughts about what Belliard or Dmitri could have gotten in this market. It seems like the demand was for relievers and not pinch hitters. Even without the contract extensions, do you think we could have gotten any reasonable prospects for these two guys?

We'll see some deals go down in the off season. Someone will hit 40 HRs for the Nats next year.

Posted by: Mr. 300* | July 31, 2007 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Last 57 Games:

32-25

Posted by: AS | July 31, 2007 4:53 PM | Report abuse

the guy, a presumed lurker and therefore a very welcome contributer, observes "[the Chief's] save chances very bad 21/28. on pace to blow 11-13 saves this year. imagine if this was a good team."

Can someone with a high-powered stats subscription ring up some stats? Mainly, how many of Chad's blown saves are one-run lead affairs and is it more or less than other team's closers. If Gagne isn't blowing as many saves (I have no idea how many he blows), but if he usually comes in with a three-run lead vis a vis Chad always coming in with a one-run lead, I care a lot less about this.

Posted by: Section 506 (After moving) | July 31, 2007 4:53 PM | Report abuse

I like the comment that the FO was "active in its passivity." Quote of the year.

Here's one too, the FO was amazingly adept at sucking.

Posted by: Jon (DC) | July 31, 2007 4:55 PM | Report abuse

I like the comment that the FO was "active in its passivity." Quote of the year.

Here's one too, the FO was amazingly adept at sucking.

Posted by: Jon (DC) | July 31, 2007 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Thats what armchair GMs do, we throw it against the wall and elicit opinions from all who care to respond. It's the fans way of being involved, but not really. We already know that whatever we say in here absolutely means zilch to those that are paid to decide, but hey, we have fun nonetheless. Now...join the frey...or go away.

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | July 31, 2007 4:56 PM | Report abuse

To those who think we did the right thing today, I just want you to name me a move we've made that would fall into the "rebuilding" category.

Where is the rebuilding? Signing 35 year olds is not rebuilding. Going through the draft is not rebuilding either. We had a chance to start rebuilding today, but instead we will be doing the same thing a year from now.

Posted by: Jon (DC) | July 31, 2007 4:57 PM | Report abuse

"Support the local team and stop second guessing everything" ?

Nah. Won't do it for Bush, won't do it for Bowden. I love the team, and support it, but second guessing is part of being a baseball fan. Also, when we are told that the number one priority is building the farm system, and Dmitri Young is signed for 3 years, it is hard not to get confused.

Posted by: Kevin | July 31, 2007 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Bowden: We're gonna keep building. No deal is off the table. We can act after the deadline, as we have in the past. Etc.

In other words, no surprises, such as well-wishes for lower extremities.

Natscan: 28-29.

Posted by: Hendo | July 31, 2007 4:59 PM | Report abuse

Or maybe even in August, as happened last year.

---

We'll see some deals go down in the off season.

Posted by: natsfan1a | July 31, 2007 4:59 PM | Report abuse

Anyway...time for around the horn & PTI...see ya

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | July 31, 2007 5:00 PM | Report abuse

hold onto what!
this is a losing team. and i don't see them getting much better next year maybe 5 to 7 games. last years 1st half was fools gold. it wasn't reality.

no one including the METS was going to trade MILLEDGE and HUMBER unless ZIMMERMAN was involved.
wake up people. the NATS are spinning their wheels in last place.

Posted by: the guy | July 31, 2007 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Barry, you rocked today, dude.

SC Nats Fan, blow a kiss at Korn for me.

To those in the commuting area, see you tonight at RFK.

Posted by: Hendo | July 31, 2007 5:03 PM | Report abuse

natscan, catching the Marlins would be sweet, but my personal preference is not to assign specific win-loss expectations so I won't weigh in on that aspect

Posted by: natsfan1a | July 31, 2007 5:04 PM | Report abuse

I think the guy above, Jon(DC) has one of the best points about it. What exactly has Bodes done that would constitute "rebuilding?" I really like Chad, he seems like a great kid, but he's NOT a dynamite closer. And if we could have gotten Humber and a High A prospect, or Carlos Gomez, whose name was suggested late in the day, that would have been a real step in the right direction. A good closer, or simply someone who is valued as such, doesn't do much for a last place team.

Posted by: Rob (Reston) | July 31, 2007 5:06 PM | Report abuse

... the vibration of trade deadline's clanging gong, signifying nothing, has started to wane; Cooperstown's big day is barely into the archives, and now MLB wants us to consider 'who's next into the hall?' On their web page, they feature a couple of likely 2008 contenders ... not. Featured beside Goose Gossage's photo is Mark McGwire and Tim Raines.

... first McGwire. There's not much to say here. He'd have been a shoe-in ... until he clammed up in front of Congress last year. In this day and age when saying nothing is a blatant admission of guilt, I'd say Mark gets in the hall when Conrad Black gives back the money.

... but it's Tim Raines who is a tug-of-war for me. Now I like the Rock, always have. As an Expo he was one of the main reasons they were contenders for so many years, and should have/could have won it all in 94 until Bud the Slug shut it all down. A Hall of Famer? You bet. But here's the thing. If Mark M and Barry B won't get a sniff because of steroids, how fair would it be to overlook the sniff that Timmy took every once in a while? Can nose candy trump Balco tofu into the HOF? Like Mark (and ultimately Barry), Tim is hall material but if steroids are not, neither then is cocaine.

Posted by: natscan reduxit (weaving yet a new set of threads) | July 31, 2007 5:07 PM | Report abuse

SC: I guess thats what you do when you are 600 miles away. at least you are interested.

Kevin: politics and baseball should not be thrown in the same sentence, regardless of the current administrations ties to the sport.

my point is that there is no region/city/sport unity in this town. go to a redskins game and you see the entire upper levels decked out in the opposing teams colors. you would not find that on a 5-11 team in KC or Seattle. And dont make the argument about transplants or proximity to other large markets - because NY, Balt, and Philly do not have that problem.

It is the same with the Nationals. And the Bullets. How many bullets fans went to games 4 years ago? If rooting for the players is not incentive enough to enjoy the team then you do not enjoy the game - you enjoy winning. Which is why the "Armchair GM" is attractive to those that subscribe to the winners only syndrome.

Congratulations for spending hours and hours posting on websites about your ideas. Its quite impressive - both for stamina and dedication. But wouldnt you rather just enjoy it instead of looking at the grass on the other side of the fence?

Posted by: theraph | July 31, 2007 5:12 PM | Report abuse

the difference with GAGNE and CHAD is that the redsox did not get him to close. they got him for the 7th inning. CHAD was not going to close for the METS either. not with WAGNER(24/25 SVS) and HEILMAN there.

call me a lurker or whatever i know i pay for my season tickets to see this god awful team try and beat other teams without any good players. the way to go is not to sign overweight old players to multi year deals. that is not rebuilding for the future. DAMN DAMN DAMN over and out.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2007 5:13 PM | Report abuse

"We already know that whatever we say in here absolutely means zilch to those that are paid to decide, but hey, we have fun nonetheless. Now...join the frey...or go away."

I dunno, SC Nats Fan, I would kind of like to avoid the THIS TEAM IS NOW DOOMED WE ARE ALL [RF]ED BASEBALL IS LEAVING DC TOMORROW BECAUSE WE DID NOT MOVE CHAD CORDERO. Also, that people are "not bright" because they have a certain vision of what is good for the team.

It's nice to discuss, but it would also be nice to think that our input mattered to the other person. Some folks on this blog are idiots, not because of what they say, but because of how they say it.

May I ask, how is the team doomed for not making a trade at deadline?

Posted by: Section 506 (After moving) | July 31, 2007 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Last 57 Games:

32-25

Posted by: AS | July 31, 2007 04:53 PM

__________

... that you, Andrew? You're very optimistic. I like that in a simple sort of way.

Posted by: natscan reduxit | July 31, 2007 5:16 PM | Report abuse

I agree.. 28-29

Posted by: natsagain | July 31, 2007 5:20 PM | Report abuse

No one is saying the team is "doomed" but it is frustrating to know that there was a very good prospect available for a very average closer and we didn't take it.

The other part that is frutrating is the insinuation that this team is close to contending (see AS's constant post of the last 57 games). We are nowhere near contending, and to think we are actually is foolish. It's the type of thinking that makes the O's go out and pay 40 million for a bullpen when they have NO PROSPECTS to bring up. That is not rebuilding.

We could have rebuilt today with some nice pieces, we didn't.

Posted by: Jon (DC) | July 31, 2007 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Rizzo for GM!

Posted by: Trader Joe | July 31, 2007 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Jon (DC)

"To those who think we did the right thing today, I just want you to name me a move we've made that would fall into the "rebuilding" category."

... this is the wrong question, since this team's success cannot be identified on the 'name' of one move. This team is not in the rebuilding category. As much as in today's world, instant gratification just isn't fast enough, we have to remember, this team is still building, after the dismantling of the Expos. There was nothing left on which to rebuild. The FO has the job of building - almost - from scratch. And when you're in that situation, you don't make silly willy-nilly deals just hoping something will take you a baby step closer to the goal. You start with a secure base and play it slow. Sure it takes longer, but baseball fans are built for comfort, not speed. At least I thought I heard someone say that once. natsfan1a?

Posted by: natscan reduxit | July 31, 2007 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Whoops, my bad. I forgot it was wins-losses, not losses-wins ;) Silly me.

25-32

Posted by: Andrew Stebbins | July 31, 2007 5:26 PM | Report abuse

SING SORRYANNO NOWWW!!!!

Posted by: bleedNATSred | July 31, 2007 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Whoa, Natscan don't throw me in with the naysayers. My comment was:

"... I didn't really want to give up anybody, but I wanted a trade ..."

By which I meant, I didn't really want to give up anybody, but a GOOD trade would have been fun.

I'm a Bowden booster. If he did not see something he liked, I'm ok with no trade. Teams that make trades just because the trade deadline is coming usually lose. As far as I'm concerned Bowden has been proven right by not trading Soriano last year. Baltimore once had a truly horrible GM in Sid Thrift who made a bunch of deadline trades giving away 7 players and got one player (Mora) in return.

Posted by: NatBisquit | July 31, 2007 5:29 PM | Report abuse

The hard thing about arguing counter-factuals is that they cannot be disproven. We can never prove to you all that keeping Chad is better than trading him for unnamed prospects (especially when the only names we have are rumors).

I will make a friendly bet that Chad Cordero is part of a wild chase for the Nats.

Posted by: Section 506 (After moving) | July 31, 2007 5:39 PM | Report abuse

This is rebuilding, not pre-fab... and it takes time... several years. The Nats spent last fall offloading anything they could to get prospects... one of them being Matt Chico, who pitches tonight. They got rid of Vidro and Guillen, Livan, several bench players... and were expected to lose 120 games.

The thing about the Nats is that except for Belliard and Young, and to a lesser extent, Schneider and Johnson, there isn't really a strong veteran presence (you could put Guzman in that group, but he has to rise up to the challenge, so to speak, between his injuries and other challenges). Belliard and Young have both had great seasons, and both signings were relatively cheap, for what they are.

You can't look at this process as simply an objective, statistical enterprise. There are intangibles involved, which do not correlate to a direct value or benefit in the trade market. Young and Belliard had no value except to an AL team looking for a DH, or someone looking for a bench player... and what are you going to get for that? Cordero and Rauch are part of one of the best bullpens in baseball. Is Cordero the best closer around? Nope... but he's in the top half...

The Nats rebuilding is at a different stage now. They need players that are zero to two years away from the bigs, rather than 2-4. The need a center fielder that can hit... but he also needs to fit in with a team that has some good chemistry.

Moving to the new park is going to solve some of the hitting. Building on this year's challenges is going to make the team better. A credible free agent signing or two is now a must. Nick has to get healthy... Someone should review the training regimen to see if there's a reason that our pitchers are so injury-prone. Someone should teach the pitchers to bunt.

The Nats are going to come to camp next year with seven or eight big-league starters, and a bunch more minor leaguers. They'll have plenty to trade...

So, yeah, anonymous, I guess you're right... they are going in exactly the wrong direction.

Posted by: Wigi | July 31, 2007 5:40 PM | Report abuse

Sorry NatBisquit. I have a difficult time with monikers. My monocles aren't too good either.

Posted by: natscan reduxit | July 31, 2007 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Nats in a wild card chase??? That is comical right now. Not for another five years.

And did someone say we "are not rebuilding?" Interesting also.

Finally, Humber and Gonzalez are not no-name prospects. They are very highly touted prospects that are ready to come to RFK tomorrow and get experience this year, and start next year. THAT is called rebuilding.

Posted by: Jon (DC) | July 31, 2007 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Jon (DC), that's why it is a bet, because I believe you to be wrong. Within five years there will be a wild card chase and I think Chad will be a key part of it for the Nats.

"THAT is called rebuilding," you say. Fair enough, I guess if you were GM, I would be in your place screaming doom on the blog. I'm fine with Stan and Jim's approach.

Posted by: Section 506 (After moving) | July 31, 2007 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Not me, natscan. I think it was the actress gal who designs baseball team wear for ladies. I can't think of her name at the moment, but do recall that she said it in re. Da Meat Hook...

---

Sure it takes longer, but baseball fans are built for comfort, not speed. At least I thought I heard someone say that once. natsfan1a?

Posted by: natsfan1a | July 31, 2007 5:55 PM | Report abuse

The Tigers finished 71-91 in 05 and 95-67 in 2006. The Cubs were 66-96 in 2006 and are one game out in the NL Central. It is not unreasonable to think that one or two years from now they could be in the playoffs.

Posted by: NatBisquit | July 31, 2007 5:55 PM | Report abuse

I completely agree with Wigi.

Posted by: wigifan | July 31, 2007 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Theraph-

Yeah, pal, I apologize about the Bush comment, but it sounded too close to something they would say. Won't do it again.

Beyond that, I don't think that the Nats made credible efforts during this trading period. However, I don't think they did stupid moves, such as trading for a clearly losing pitcher like Lohse, or trading anyone for Octavio Dotel, who is not nearly the reliever Cordero is.

My unscientific, non-insider feeling (can I give any more caveats to make this a friendly comment?) is that Bowden's poor reputation has some effect. I so very much wanted him to pull something off for big name prospects (or just Milledge) that would have had me on food.com looking for crow recipes. I just can't be sure that his reputation is irrelevant to his ability to make trades.

Look, even if it costs us placement in next year's draft, I want US to win so many games that the naysayers enjoy that crow. But today was the day Bowden pointe us to when he signed both Ronnie and Dmitri. Those were empty words.

Posted by: Kevin | July 31, 2007 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Alyssa Milano (the actress chick, and actually a real baseball fan. Well, as much as a Dodger's fan can be "real").

Posted by: joebleux | July 31, 2007 5:58 PM | Report abuse

Wigi! You invited your mom to the blog, awesome!

I completely agree with Wigi.

Posted by: wigifan | July 31, 2007 05:55 PM

Posted by: Section 506 (After moving) | July 31, 2007 5:58 PM | Report abuse

Loved that one, natscan!

---

Sorry NatBisquit. I have a difficult time with monikers. My monocles aren't too good either.

Posted by: natsfan1a | July 31, 2007 5:59 PM | Report abuse

Could Jon in DC be the Wookie? Nah.

Posted by: natsfan1a | July 31, 2007 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Thanks, joeb, that's her!

---

Alyssa Milano (the actress chick, and actually a real baseball fan. Well, as much as a Dodger's fan can be "real").

Posted by: Alyssa Milano (the actress chick, and actually a real baseball fan. Well, as much as a Dodger's | July 31, 2007 6:03 PM | Report abuse

"Could Jon in DC be the Wookie? Nah."

Maybe he's tired of being in Chad's shadow (or tired of having Chad in his shadow?) and wanted to trade him bad so he could be closer.

Posted by: Section 506 (After moving) | July 31, 2007 6:03 PM | Report abuse

That was me, on the joeb-thanks posting. There was a cutting-and-pasting malfunction. Mistakes were made. I need to eat something now (not crow, though).

Posted by: natsfan1a | July 31, 2007 6:05 PM | Report abuse

Natscan -

Before Raines, Andre Dawson.

Credibility of "The Plan" - Lots and lots of money spent on well respected scouts, talent evaluators, organizational instructors, scouting programs, etc... Mike Rizzo among others. Time will tell how they do with draft picks. As for trades, if Mike Rizzo or any of the other talent evaluators/scouts had thought there was a trade offer that was favorable to the Nats (that is, make the major league team better) surely they would have urged J.Bow to make the trade. Let's ask Barry to ask the scouts if they felt there was a trade on the table that J. Bow should have made. I hope all the focus on Bowden in this blog is misplaced, I would hope that the Nats decision making process takes the opinions of the organization's considerable scouting talents into consideration.

Finally, to those having fun ripping the FO for not pulling triggers, please put your plan for making the major league team better/into a contender in the shortest time in writing so the rest of us can be entertained.

Posted by: natsagain | July 31, 2007 6:22 PM | Report abuse

I think Bowden's bad rep has as much to do with the Nats organization (pre-Lerner) as it does with his abrasive personality. As people respect the Nats, people will respect Bowden.

People (Conventional Wisdom People) clearly DON'T respect the Nats, and execpt in this one arena where people might hold JimBo at arm's length, that is good. We don't want the Nats on anyone's radar until the 9th inning of game six, winning 5-2 with a 3-2 series lead...

Posted by: Wigi | July 31, 2007 6:23 PM | Report abuse

I don't think Chad will blow 11-13 saves this year, as the Guy says. He is on the up-swing after some very bad personal issues this spring and summer. And he is young, keeping with the plan. So is Rauch, only 28. This team isn't BAD! They compete every day and play hard. They don't shame themselves nor do they shame the fans with their play. Just watch when one of them makes a great play or gets a key hit. All of the players are on the dugout rail and waiting for their team-mate to come home. I just see (IMO) a team that can win in a year or two with very little added players. The pitching has been very good considering all of the A and AA guys thrown into the bigs this season. They WILL get better. Granted, we need someone with some pop to the bat. But we need to keep most of our MLB best bullpen intact to compete until all of our young pitchers learn the ropes and are ready for the majors. Rather than trading for the sake of trading, I would like the Learners to loosen the wallet this off season and sign a free agent or two who will hit 30-40 homers in the new stadium.

Posted by: Nick from Germantown | July 31, 2007 6:34 PM | Report abuse

New ball park is going to affect hitting, pitching and feilding. It will take a third of a season to verify. So how can you say the new stadium will have a greater affect on one part of the game? Too many variable to say for sure at this time how the stadium will affect the teams makeup.

Posted by: Tom | July 31, 2007 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Tom:

It will be (with 98 percent certainty) more of a hitters park than RFK. My theory is that it will be more of a hitter's park than most. The thing is... the team's confidence will be better there... better facilities, etc. so they'll perform better.

Our current team wins 75-80 in the new park, I think...

OK... off to fishing.

Posted by: Wigi | July 31, 2007 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Not rebuilding eh...hmmm, maybe that is correct that it is merely building, for there wasn't much to rebuild. Confused yet?? Anyway, as for signs of building, they have poured a ton of loot at the lower levels and at getting top notch scouts to scour bushes for talent, not to mention an academy in the DR. Way, way down the road I believe not jumping the gun will bear fruit, depth and stability. So sit back and watch and wait for it to grow and ripen, as its just a bit early to pick just yet. Patience with the playpen plan.

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | July 31, 2007 6:50 PM | Report abuse

... you know Kevin, as much as I'm happy with the way turned out, I will say I agree with you on a few points: I agree that JimBow is hamstrung by his own rep. In this case however, I'm in the camp that is happy that it kept him from making useless deals. I agree that if he had been successful in obtaining Lastings M., I'd have applauded ... but only until I realized what it cost, because I expect I would have mourned the loss of whoever would have had to be sacrificed.

... but I can't put on the shining armour of eager anticipation that you wear. As much as I'd like the negativists to eat crow, I want to base my satisfaction about the team's eventual success on more positive values.

... I also don't share your critical analysis about the value of signing Dmitri. That signing is less than a week old, and it won't be shown a success or a failure on what did or didn't transpire on trading day

Posted by: natscan reduxit | July 31, 2007 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Sect506: "...to trade him bad so he could be closer"

... now that's TRULY sly!!

Posted by: natscan reduxit | July 31, 2007 7:04 PM | Report abuse

Nick from Germantown:

"Just watch when one of them makes a great play or gets a key hit. All of the players are on the dugout rail and waiting for their team-mate to come home. I just see (IMO) a team that can win in a year or two with very little added players."

... I agree with you on the hard work of this team; of their determination and their passion. While I don't agree they'll be competitive in a mere two years, I agree whole-heartedly in the direction they're going.

natsagain:

"Before Raines, Andre Dawson."

... OH! the memories! ... But this is a Nats blog, so ...

Hey! The game's on! Go Nats!

Posted by: natscan reduxit | July 31, 2007 7:12 PM | Report abuse

"Not close to being competitive"? So what do you call competitive? The Braves were 55-51 this morning, 4-1/2 back of the Mets. They are very much in it.
The Nats have played about even since May 10 -- this IS a .500 team that got off to a horrible start. Spit, duct tape, smoke and mirrors, maybe, but the W/L is what it is. And as of this morning, a .500 team would be about 5-1/2 games out of the wild card, which is competitive on Aug. 1. IF they signed Joe Hardy (I know, I know - we had him last year) they are 7 games better. They don't have to be the '27 Yankees, they don't even have to win the wild card, to be competitive. They can absolutely do that next year. Will they? Who knows? Are they World Series-close? Of course not, but neither were the Cardinals last year. Play the games, beat people who thought you couldn't; it's more fun that way.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2007 11:23 PM | Report abuse

My point above being, enjoy the 162 games, and you'll be happier if you concentrate on the output, rather than the outcome. (Yeah, yeah, wrong town, I know.)

Posted by: cevansjr | July 31, 2007 11:26 PM | Report abuse

and I might as well stick to my irrational pre-season guns, and say 34-21 the rest of the way, to finish 80-81 (with a rainout).

Posted by: cevans | July 31, 2007 11:33 PM | Report abuse

and did we mention that 22 of the remaining 56 games are against teams currently under, mostly well under, .500? Not a brutal schedule.

Posted by: cevans | July 31, 2007 11:39 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company