Network News

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

Doubleheader Thursday; Clippard Sunday?

The game was called about half an hour ago after about two hours and 35 minutes of waiting. There will be a doubleheader tomorrow, the make-up at 1:10 and the original game still at 7:10. Same pitching matchups also apply: Lannan vs. Wellemeyer early, Tim Redding vs. Mike Parisi late.

Here's the deal for those NJ readers with tickets, verbatim from the Nats press release: Tickets from tonight's rained out game will serve as a rain check for tomorrow's rescheduled game at 1:10 p.m. at Nationals Park, or may be exchanged for the same priced seat to a future Nationals home game during the 2008 regular season. All rain check exchanges are subject to availability.

Now the good stuff: As you can see from this box score Tyler Clippard pitched only two innings in his start last night, allowing no hits and no runs. Nats PR maven Bill Gluvna checked to ensure Clippard had not been injured; he was not. The tea leaves will tell you Clippard will fill in for Odalis Perez on Sunday. Right, Manny Acta?

He shrugged. "I'm not really up to speed why" Clippard only went two, he said. "Good guess, though." The smart money, it seems, is on Clippard to start Sunday. Clippard, before tonight's two innings, was 4-4 with a 3.53 ERA in Columbus. In his major league career, all with the New York Yankees in 2007, Clippard went 3-1 with a 6.33 ERA and allowed 29 hits and 17 walks in 27 innings.

Chico is back with you tomorrow. Thanks for putting up with me.

By Adam Kilgore  |  June 4, 2008; 10:48 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Who should start? And who will?
Next: 9:56 a.m.

Comments

What Bowden and Kasten taketh away, Mother Nature giveth back.

That's right, a businessman's special day game!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Those meetings tomorrow are SOOOOO cancelled!

Posted by: kevinx | June 4, 2008 11:02 PM | Report abuse

Dang! Sorry that I won't be able to partake in the businessperson's special...

We enjoyed having you, Mr. K.

Posted by: natsfan1a | June 4, 2008 11:16 PM | Report abuse

Big day tomorrow. 2 games and the draft!

Fingers are crossed I'll get to see Clippard's Nats debut at the park on Sunday.

Posted by: LetTeddyWin.com | June 4, 2008 11:23 PM | Report abuse

That should read: "Doubleheader Thursday" --not Wednesday.

Posted by: Fisch Fry | June 4, 2008 11:33 PM | Report abuse

It sure isn't going to be Ross Detwiler. For those of you taking notes at home, RD got rocked yet again tonight. For a college arm in A+ ball, this is not good at all. Chris Marrero continues to struggle, as well.

Posted by: Jimmy Tango | June 4, 2008 11:54 PM | Report abuse

i missed the doubleheader!! why baseball gods whyyyyyy...oh wait typo

Posted by: love | June 5, 2008 1:43 AM | Report abuse

I'm still betting on Mock. He's got better stuff and has been just as good this year.

Posted by: Hoagie | June 5, 2008 2:03 AM | Report abuse

Ha!

An oversupply of karma! ? Can we cash some of it in on Thursday?

Posted by: i hate walks | June 5, 2008 2:38 AM | Report abuse

Dan Snyder just bought WTEM. There goes Phil Wood's appearances, and Chico's future ones. Barry used to freshen up the airwaves there. There are now no stations but Snyder Intertass. "The Team" was not great, but at least they were critical of Snyder and had some baseball. Now, all summer long will be devoted to mini-camps and 3rd string defensive ends. Thank God for the double header today!

Posted by: flynnie | June 5, 2008 7:49 AM | Report abuse

I'm intrigued, flynnie. Much has been discussed here about the relationship Angelos and MASN, but has Snyder adopted an openly anti-baseball in DC pose as well? Your inference suggest that his purchase of WTEM signals that he perceives the Nats as a threat to the Skins.

Posted by: lowcountry | June 5, 2008 8:02 AM | Report abuse

didn't snyder have an interest in buying the nats?

what if he bought the orioles?!?!?! mark it here. i called it first.

Posted by: longterm | June 5, 2008 8:12 AM | Report abuse

lowcountry- your are mercifully out of range of xxxredskinsradio-where the local programming is all redskins, and the national feed from Bristol is Mike& Mike or Colin Cowherd from Bristol. I don't think Snyder's anti-baseball, but the WTEM broadcasters, particularly Steve Czabin, Andy Pollin and Doc Walker have been rubbing Snyder's rhubarb for a long time. And the little time that is devoted to baseball is likely to disappear into the yawning maw of football. Let's not even talk about WTEM being the birthplace (in D.C) of Steve Colby and the present-day Caps coverage. Phil Wood has a very enjoyable two hour baseball show from 10-12 on Saturdays, which I would be surprised to see continue, since he is not marketing the redskins.

Posted by: flynnie | June 5, 2008 8:15 AM | Report abuse

Flynnie, I'm hoping that Snyder purchasing TEM will turn out to be a good thing in the long term for us baseball fans, and here's why: WTEM was never good on baseball and the Nats. Many of their hosts were downright hostile to baseball, if not completely ignorant about it. Having hosts who know nothing about the Nats "interview" Bowden or Barry is worthless for actual fans, because they're not educated discussions. Also, a once-a-week two-hour Phil Wood baseball show is hardly sufficient or appropriate. Special shows like that should be for niche sports, not for baseball.

With Snyder taking over TEM, my hope is that before long, some company will seize the market opportunity and start a real sports talk competitor that focuses on other sports in addition to the Skins. Since the Nats are now an entrenched team, the Nats would hopefully be a big part of their programming. Let's see how things shake out, but in my opinion TEM was already a lost cause, so this is not a big loss in the first place.

Posted by: Coverage is lacking | June 5, 2008 8:22 AM | Report abuse

Thanks, flynnie. Mercifully sounds correct. I just figured that if Snyder was against the Nats than we must indeed be on the side of goodness and light! Does he go to any of the games?

On another note - as evidenced by my presence at the writing desk - I am not on the way up to join for two today. I appreciate the invite and hope to take it up at another time. Enjoy the games - I predict Nats win two today with Nieves coming up big in the nightcap.

Posted by: lowcountry | June 5, 2008 8:23 AM | Report abuse

Coverage is Lacking - Hope is a good thing. You are right re: baseball, and WTEM talent in general. In the last year, it had gotten more sophomoric, an attempt to be like the sports junkies, and was just not worth listening to. In fact, besides the odd comment by Tom Lovarro, it's been unlisten-able for quite some time. How sweet would it be to have Charlie and Dave all year? Although listening to them endure callers after a game, I suspect their store of charity would soon be exhausted.

Posted by: flynnie | June 5, 2008 8:35 AM | Report abuse

lowcountry- I don't know if Dan is a fan. Surely he has a box at NatsPark, but if he's been there, I've missed it. And I've watched just about every inning of every game.

Posted by: flynnie | June 5, 2008 8:41 AM | Report abuse

Typo fixed. Thanks for pointing that towering moment of stupidity. Five hours of rain delays in two days will do funny things to the mind.

Posted by: Adam Kilgore | June 5, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

i wasn't around to respond to this one last night, SoCH, so i'll respond now.

===


A rumor is just a rumor. I just shared cuz it's fun to BS. If it's at all true, it would be outrageous. But a rumor's just a rumor.

Then, for whatever reason, you feel compelled to jump in and defend Bowden, as you have many times.

Yeah, you say, "I don't like him," but then you say he shouldn't be fired, that it's unfair to say he should, that anyone who says he should be fired has some axe to grind and is just out to get him, etc. I don't get that.

Posted by: Steven on Capitol Hill | June 4, 2008 8:15 PM
===

a) i wasn't objecting to sharing the rumor, that's cool. it just gets tiresome that everything's an opportunity to say "look how much bowden sucks", even when it's not a fact but just an unsubstantiated rumor and may have nothing to do with bowden whatsoever. as i keep repeating, there's plenty of legit stuff to b1tch about, why make up stuff.

b) i wasn't defending bowden. please reread if that's confusing. there's a difference between calling someone out for BS when they attack him and defending the person being attacked. i was commenting on your position about a specific rumor, not saying bowden was good.

c) please point out any place i've ever said "bowden shouldn't be fired," or anything like that. i've said i don't dislike him as much as you, but i've never said he should be the GM here. really, go back and look, you won't find it. nor have i said anyone who said he should be fired "has an axe to grind" or "is out to get him." i've responded to *specific* comments criticizing specific events/signings/trades by saying they were overcriticized.

maybe i'm coming across wrong in the written word, so let me make it clear. i'm not a bowden fan. i don't think he should be our manager and i hope they hire someone new this offseason. i agree that his overall record with this team (and i really don't care what he did with the reds, just what he's done here) isn't up-to-snuff and we could do better. we could also do worse (i.e., brian sabean). i just get tired of specious arguments and ad hominem attacks on the guy, even if i don't like him.

Posted by: 231 | June 5, 2008 9:44 AM

Posted by: 231 | June 5, 2008 9:46 AM | Report abuse

@231--I just can't follow what you're saying. I don't think Bowden should be here. You're saying you agree. And yet, you persist in disagreeing with me every time I post anything remotely critical of him.

On the rumor, I just posted a rumor. I didn't say it was a reason for Bowden to be fired. I've said over and over that he should be fired because he's consistently failed over a decade and a half in 2 cities to field a winner, which is the only criteria that matters.

If I said, "based on this rumor, Bowden should be fired," then you'd have a point. But I didn't say that. I just shared a rumor, and you, for like the millionth time, jumped up to defend Bowden, all the while insisting you don't like him and agree that he should be fired.

So I'm back to not understanding what your point is.

Posted by: Steven on Capitol Hill | June 5, 2008 11:15 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company