Network News

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

Da Meat Is in Da House

I hate to interrupt y'all's brainstorming session of all famous Boones and Boone-related puns -- I loved "boone-doggle," by the way, but am surprised nobody made a reference to Boone's Farm -- but there are other nuggets of news worth passing along here, before I sit down and start cranking out copy for the .35-cent edition.

First, the list of early-arriving position players now includes first baseman Dmitri Young and right fielder Austin Kearns, who showed up today and had a spirited workout with the rest of the team's early arrivals. Obviously, Young is somebody to watch this spring, since he parlayed a minor-league contract into an all-star appearance, a comeback player of the year award and a $10 million payday, but still does not have a guaranteed starting job, thanks to Nick Johnson's comeback. Young, who, incidentally, appears to have lost some weight, said what is obvious: "We both deserve to start, but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it."

John Patterson's first bullpen: Solid, not spectacular. Good fastball, good slider, a little wild with the curve. But he said he was happy with it, and that he felt great afterwards.

Weather here: 86 degrees, but thunderstorms passing through.

Soundtrack: Dwight Yoakam, "Dwight Sings Buck"

By Dave Sheinin  |  February 18, 2008; 2:05 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: NEWS FLASH: Nats Sign Bret Boone to Minor League Deal
Next: Waiting On Odalis

Comments

Did Patterson throw 6 minutes like Hill or 8 minutes like the rest of the pitchers?

Posted by: jpsfanandproudofit | February 18, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Reposting so that credit will be given where due. :)

---

It's just trader Jim making sure he meets his 'moves quota' for February. It truly is now 'Boones Farm' in Viera. I'll drink to that.

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | February 18, 2008 11:35 AM

Posted by: natsfan1a | February 18, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

Good question. And did anyone break out the radar gun?

Also, how much is some weight off Meat? Here's hoping for triple digits and yet another outfield option. Heh.

Thanks DS

Posted by: nattaboy | February 18, 2008 2:40 PM | Report abuse

Oops. I must have missed SC Nats Fan's comment with the Boone's Farm reference. My apologies.

To jpsfanandproudofit: John threw the full eight minutes (and actually a few seconds beyond).

To nattaboy: I asked Dmitri how much weight he lost, and he said, "Enough." My estimate? Fifteen pounds.

Posted by: Dave Sheinin | February 18, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Another question please, Dave - what did Manny and/or Randy say about Patterson's bullpen? Were they happy with it?

Posted by: jpsfanandproudofit | February 18, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

I guess i'll be happy with "Solid, not spectacular" but it'll be interesting to see where that goes. Did meat take BP? If so, how did he look compared to NJ? Thanks for the updates.

Posted by: VT Nats Fan | February 18, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

"Dwight Sings Buck"?

Excellent. Good genre spread, and an excellent individual choice.

I am glad for guys coming early. Let's start working toward Vegas's patheitc over/under of 71.5 wins. If I could bet on that legally, I would put $25 on the over, for kicks. Then again, it is so much more satisfying than the conventional wisdom over/under of 43 last year. I have no idea of what Vegas's line was last year.

Posted by: Positively Half St. | February 18, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

No apology necessary. We're just glad to have some reports coming over the net on what's happening down there, as we all can't be there. Just keep up the posts til BS arrives and all will be right in the Booneyard.

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | February 18, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Barry mentioned a few weeks ago, if I remember correctly, that Meat lost up to 23 lbs. Anywhere between 15 and 25 is great for an already superb athletic specimen. HA!

Posted by: AJ | February 18, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Another little thought about JimBow...the Lerners can never fire him, if they do, they best be prepared to replace all the players and coaches he would eventually drag with him, if history is anything to go by.

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | February 18, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

BREAKING NEWS....sportstalk 980 is readying to take calls on the NATS, nah, couldn't be....could it?

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | February 18, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Possible correction to my earlier post:
"Barry mentioned a few weeks ago, if I remember correctly, that Meat lost up to 23 lbs. Anywhere between 15 and 25 is great for an already superb athletic specimen. HA!"
Now that I think about it he may have been talking about Ray King, who has lost over 20 lbs as well. Either way, congrats to both of those guys regardless of the actual number.

Posted by: AJ | February 18, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

... sorry to do this to you guys, but I'm just a simple Canucklehead I guess.

"Boone's Farm"?????

Posted by: natscan reduxit | February 18, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Boone's Farm"wine

Posted by: Anonymous | February 18, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

Here's a link, natscan, in case you want to know more. It's a California wine, but probably not what you might think given that much info:

http://www.boonesfarm.net/

Posted by: natsfan1a | February 18, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Dwight Sings Buck sounds interesting. Will have to check it out. Makes me think longingly of the days before WAMU cut back on their Sunday music programming. I would guess that recording would have been a natural for the Eddie Stubbs show. But I digress.

Exciting to think that the players are checking in and the season is starting up again...

Posted by: natsfan1a | February 18, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Sorry to go back, but I still don't understand the reasoning for trading either DY or Nick J. Dave suggested that "it's a luxury they cannot afford". With fear of stirring up the "Lerners are cheap" crowd, this makes no sense. They are affording it right now. They have the money assinged to them. They don't need to cut payroll. They absolutely need all the offense they can muster. Let's see how the team starts out before they unload one of these guys for a prospect. The only argument that makes sense is if either of them would have such a bad attitude as to be unproductive in a bench role. That would be unfortunate.

If one of them is traded, I hope it's DY. A 29 year old, high OBP, LH hitter with power, even one who is injury prone, should not be traded by a team with a weak offensive farm system. It's nice to pencil in Marrero, but he hasn't shown he can hit above high A or play 1B yet.

Posted by: #4 | February 18, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Boone's Farm is famous among the younger crowd for being a starter alcoholic drink. It's very fruity with low alcoholic content, but enough to make you buzzing and feel like you're rebelling.

Posted by: Boonee | February 18, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Check the Nat's Stadium site. Not only is the whole bottom section of the red seats in, but there is a section in CF up in the covering (at least in the 6:03 shot) and the OF is spectacularly green.

#4 makes sense re: NJ v. DaMeat trade. Nothing immediately. If Marrero looks good in June / July, maybe a pre Trade deadline deal for Meat w/ an AL club, looking for a P/T 1st base, full time DH. That would give us a very good read on Marrero's progress as well as a first look at what we get in the Draft.

If it's all about the future, that should put the Nats in the best possible position.

Posted by: Catcher50 | February 18, 2008 6:15 PM | Report abuse

OK, folks. Eric Gagne followed Lo Duca via ason Giambi and apologized generically without mentioning steroids or the Mitchell Report.

The red seats in the outfield were a surprise- why are they different than the blue of the others? I hope it is for a good reason.

Posted by: Positively Half St. | February 18, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

hey dave, i have to wonder how many of the players tend to regularly check the stadium cam as we fans do...

Posted by: 231 | February 18, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

The red seats in the outfield are the Centerfield Club and Centerfield Lounge seats, also perhaps the Batter's Eye Box seats on top of the restaurant. I saw an ad recently where those sections were being marketed with a special name like Red Seat Porch or some such. That's why they're painted differently from the rest of the seats.

Posted by: Section 419+1 | February 18, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

I wonder who they well end up tossing from our glut of OF guys.

Posted by: Alex35332 | February 18, 2008 6:52 PM | Report abuse

for those of you who bash ownership for being cheap, at least we're not the twinkies!

from buster olney's column today:

===

E-mailed Twins reliever Pat Neshek about his early impressions of the Twins' camp. His response:

"[Monday] is the big first day. We have always been one of the later reporting teams ... saves money!

Posted by: 231 | February 18, 2008 8:15 PM | Report abuse

We are better the the Marlins

Posted by: alex35332 | February 18, 2008 8:23 PM | Report abuse

According to Ladson on the official site (I know, quite a loaded preface), the Nats are interested in Odalis Perez.

Take that for what it's worth. What I actually find interesting about the article is that, according to Ladson, the rotation going into Spring Training is expected to be Patterson, Hill, Bergman, Lannan, and Chico.

The Nationals signed a one-year, $1 million contract with Redding in January. That doesn't get him thrown in there, maybe over Lannan?

I dunno.

Posted by: John in Mpls | February 18, 2008 8:30 PM | Report abuse

Hope it wasn't the Red A** Porch...

---

The red seats in the outfield are the Centerfield Club and Centerfield Lounge seats, also perhaps the Batter's Eye Box seats on top of the restaurant. I saw an ad recently where those sections were being marketed with a special name like Red Seat Porch or some such. That's why they're painted differently from the rest of the seats.

Posted by: Anonymous | February 18, 2008 8:32 PM | Report abuse

I just got that, natscan. Cute!

---

I'm just a simple Canucklehead I guess.

Posted by: natsfan1a | February 18, 2008 8:33 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of Neshek, I wonder whether he's still running his blog this year. Will have to check that out.

---

E-mailed Twins reliever Pat Neshek about his early impressions of the Twins' camp. His response:

Posted by: natsfan1a | February 18, 2008 8:35 PM | Report abuse

Has Dukes shown up to camp yet? I'm wondering what Dmitri has to say about their workouts together.

Posted by: Nats Fan | February 18, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

Positively Half St: "OK, folks. Eric Gagne followed Lo Duca via ason Giambi and apologized generically without mentioning steroids or the Mitchell Report."

I heard on XM 175 tonight while driving home that Gagne's statement was also given in his native French, to Quebec reporters, and that he did specifically mention the Mitchell report in that segment of his press conference, though I doubt in much detail.

Someone else mentioned the Vegas over / under line is 71.5 games won - Baseball Prospectus picks us to finish last in the division with 72 wins. I'm not buying it.

Posted by: tomterp | February 18, 2008 9:25 PM | Report abuse

Thank you, I thought the same thing re: Redding. 15 starts w/ 3.64 ERA and a $1m contract? He should be written in stone on this team. Why would Lannan be in there?

My rotation is Patterson, Hill, Bergman, Redding, Chico.

---

The Nationals signed a one-year, $1 million contract with Redding in January. That doesn't get him thrown in there, maybe over Lannan?

I dunno.

Posted by: John in Mpls | February 18, 2008 08:30 PM

Posted by: Avar | February 18, 2008 10:12 PM | Report abuse

... thanx for the wine info, everyone. Back in my day, the kids would hang around outside the liquor store and cajole young adults heading inside, to buy them a bottle of cheap wine - usually some horrendous stuff claiming to be sherry. Names like 1066 and Block & Tackle come to mind. Moving up the social ladder we arrived at the ubiquitous Baby Duck, then on to European plonk like Casal Mendes or Mateus

... now back to our regularly scheduled Spring Training.

Go Nats!

Posted by: natscan reduxit | February 18, 2008 10:27 PM | Report abuse

Maybe the nats should switch to coonskin caps instead of the curly W's with all the Boones.

Posted by: natsinthevalley | February 18, 2008 11:41 PM | Report abuse

natscan reduxit: how old am i? i forget... but i remember that before boone's farm was, there was thunderbird.

if mateus was kerosene, thunderbird was bunker oil... (and boone's farm was like some cleaning compound.)

on baseball (were we talking about baseball?) my sense is that barring more than one catastrophic injury or failure -- each -- among projected starters and pitchers, we are going to improve 15% in the win column, which would get us just a few games over .500.

in other words, even if one of our top 5 pitchers and top 8 position players goes down to injury or is traded, we should be around 83-79.

Posted by: natty bumppo | February 19, 2008 4:31 AM | Report abuse

just to clarify, what i should have said was, "in other words, even if one -- each -- of our top 5 pitchers AND top 8 position players go down to injury or are traded, we should be around 83-79."

Posted by: natty bumppo | February 19, 2008 4:37 AM | Report abuse

The webmaster for the Nationals' official web page should choose a different picture of Bret Boone. It makes him look 60 years old.

I simply don't get the idea of signing Odalis Perez, except that he is a lefty. He had attitude problems in LA (insert joke here), and was worse than our youngsters and scrap heap pickups like Redding last year. Yes, yes, he was in the American League, but it isn't that impressive if that improves his ERA from sub-6 to sub-5.

Natty Bumppo- I will accept a slightly above .500 record this year. I would even be a little giddy to see it.

Posted by: Positively Half St. | February 19, 2008 5:01 AM | Report abuse

+1/2 St: A little? If we finish >.500 I'll be like ten cups of coffee giddy! Are you kidding me?

Posted by: i hate walks | February 19, 2008 8:04 AM | Report abuse

Yea, and >.500 will be sweeter with all the 72-win talk. Let's stay under the radar just a little longer.

Posted by: NatsNut | February 19, 2008 8:08 AM | Report abuse

... and this just in from the G.5F, Sunny Optimism dept.:

natty bumppo says: "83-79"

+.5St says: "just above .500"

C'mon you guys. Surely with all the little tweaks and JimBow improvements, we can break 90 W's this year. ... surely? .... .... anyone?

Posted by: natscan reduxit | February 19, 2008 8:14 AM | Report abuse

natscan suggests 90 curly w's, to the sound of

...crickets...

---

But seriously folks, I'd be happy with a winning season (well, wild card would be okay with me, too).

Posted by: natsfan1a | February 19, 2008 8:35 AM | Report abuse

90+ wins, I'm not willing to go that high. At least, not yet. If they get to .500 this season, fans will be dancing in the streets. Thats not an unreasonable prediction, I say. Perhaps, with a little break here and there, they might even reach 3 to 5 games over .500. On the most recent Boone signing, could it be insurance that whomever wins the 2nd & shortstop jobs this spring, that the other, be it Lopez, Belliard or Guzman might be traded, and that Boone would become the backup for this year. I wouldn't put that scenario past JimBow and his ability/want/desire to acquire additional young prospects for the future. Certainly seems to fit his mindset doesn't it?

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | February 19, 2008 8:35 AM | Report abuse

As I've said several times, with good health, I truly believe this team is capable of winning close to ninety games.
I imagine, natscan, that you have tongue in cheek, but I'm dead serious.
Maybe it's a pipe dream. Maybe, as a fellow Canuck, I'm still trying to deal with the strike in /94. Whatever.

Posted by: Jeeves | February 19, 2008 8:39 AM | Report abuse

yeah sorry, can't take 90 wins. Although, I'd be happy to eat crow if you're right!

I'm in the 83 wins camp, even going so far as to agree w/ bumppo that we will hit that even w/ 1-2 significant losses to injury/trade.

Posted by: Avar | February 19, 2008 8:43 AM | Report abuse

I go away for a weekend and... wow! Just, wow!

No, I'm not talking about the signing of another Boone (collect all three!), or of Patterson throwing well enough, or of Meat Hook losing weight, or even of Nick the Stick coming back.

I'm talking about the positively joyful tone of this blog. I'm grinning too folks, welcome back baseball!

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | February 19, 2008 8:58 AM | Report abuse

Check out Floridatoday.com for a very nice spring training preview today. Lots of Nats stuff.

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | February 19, 2008 9:06 AM | Report abuse

90 wins? Spring is the time for optimism, but please. Predictions like that are just silly. There is no way this team as presently constituted will even smell 90 wins in 2008.

Posted by: Coverage is lacking | February 19, 2008 9:06 AM | Report abuse

"There is no way this team as presently constituted will even smell 90 wins in 2008."

And if they do, there is no way the Post as presently constituted would adequately cover it.

Just had to add that to tamp down all this irrational giddiness that's sprouting up around here, don'tcha know. Even though it's spring training, it's best not to get TOO carried away with optimism, because if you do the inevitable crash of reality just ends up hitting harder.

Posted by: Section 419+1 | February 19, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

Hi Jeeves,

"I imagine, natscan, that you have tongue in cheek, but I'm dead serious."

... well I wasn't being totally serious like you are, but still my tongue was correctly placed. I was trying to elicit response to the notion that the team COULD win 90. My own sense is that it won't happen but could ... given a little luck.

... like the other Natsters, I'd be ecstatic over a winning season.

Posted by: natscan reduxit | February 19, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

anything *could* happen, but even getting to 500 will take a bit of luck. which means it's the right goal.

Posted by: 231 | February 19, 2008 9:15 AM | Report abuse

new post

Posted by: natsfan1a | February 19, 2008 9:39 AM | Report abuse

I believe in ridiculous optimism and getting your heart broken and doing it again next year.

That being said, I do think the Nats are THE positive story this year with the new stadium and so many possible comeback stories that one has to come true. I'm talking nationally covered and agreed upon, similar to the late-season Redskins.

They're going to ride it past 72 wins. How far? More than 90 is possible too.


I choose Lannan (and possibly Clippard)over Redding in a heartbeat. I really hope we don't need the latter in the rotation, at least until June.

Posted by: nattaboy | February 19, 2008 10:13 AM | Report abuse

90 wins would take more than good health and average luck, but in the spirit of Spring, hey, there's always at least one Cinderella at the ball.

Posted by: CE | February 19, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Man, you'd never last a week as a Cubs fan...

*********
Just had to add that to tamp down all this irrational giddiness that's sprouting up around here, don'tcha know. Even though it's spring training, it's best not to get TOO carried away with optimism, because if you do the inevitable crash of reality just ends up hitting harder.
Posted by: Section 419+1 | February 19, 2008 09:13 AM

Posted by: Broken hearts don't scare us: they define us. | February 19, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company