Network News

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

Law of averages

There's a simple reason why the Nats, with today's 4 p.m. trading deadline fast approaching, are nowhere close to any sort of deal that will drastically reshape their major league roster. It's because so many of the tradeable veterans on the team have underperformed. As a result, a day hailed for its ability to create the unexpected might leave the Nats with a roster that looks a lot like yesterday's. And that team just lost its eighth straight game.

Anyway, check for blog updates today if any trades arise. If not, I'll be here at 4 p.m. (or just a bit thereafter) with a little post-deadline analysis.

During yesterday's chat, I promised a breakdown of Washington's lineup -- looking particularly at the number of players hitting below their career averages. So this morning, with the help of Microsoft Excel, Texas Instruments and Statspass.com, I pulled a spreadsheet together.

Some notes:

* I included position players who've received 50 or more at bats this season, or 19 players. Eighteen of them -- all but Rob Mackowiak -- are still with the team.

* Twelve of the 19 have averages this year below their career averages entering 2008.

* Five of the six players who entered the year without more than 1,000 big league at bats are batting above their career averages.

* On the flip side, only two of the 13 players who entered the year with a substantial track record of major league experience are hitting above their career averages. (Willie Harris and Cristian Guzman)

Analyze further if you bear to...


avgs.jpg

By Chico Harlan  |  July 31, 2008; 9:01 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Tradeability, signability
Next: Lineups, Lannan, deadline...

Comments

Mistake 1: Using batting average to encapsulate their offensive contributions.

Posted by: Chris | July 31, 2008 9:04 AM | Report abuse

What (if anything) does it mean about Lenny Harris that the young guys are improving and the vets are regressing?

The conclusion here isn't obvious off the top of my head, and I'm wondering if anyone could shed some light.

Posted by: 3434 | July 31, 2008 9:07 AM | Report abuse

I don't know but was Aaron Boone speaking another language last night?

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 9:08 AM | Report abuse

There isn't any conclusion.

One of the kids had just 50 ABs last year, so that's a small enough sample to be meaningless. Another hit .190 in about 1/3 of a season, which was clearly below his talent level. Flores is a legit improvement, at least.

Posted by: Chris | July 31, 2008 9:09 AM | Report abuse

"During yesterday's chat, I promised a breakdown of Washington's lineup -- looking particularly at the number of players hitting below their career averages."

"Mistake 1: Using batting average to encapsulate their offensive contributions."

He didn't promise to examine offensive contributions; he promised to give a breakdown of AVG differentials. And delivered pretty well, as far as I can see. I think this adequately demonstrates the point that a big chunk of our team is performing well below their career numbers, and the breakdown by person interests me the most.

Posted by: 3434 | July 31, 2008 9:11 AM | Report abuse

nothing terrible about passing on Crow and signing 2 top 10s next year. i'm convinced that we are really establishing some footing to negotiate with Strasburg by playing hard with Crow.

Still agree with the plan. i'm mostly frustrated with the play on the field.

Seems like destin hood is off to a good start also...

Posted by: longterm | July 31, 2008 9:16 AM | Report abuse

I got the follolwing from Brian at Nationals Farm Authority (NFA). I recommend Brian and his website highly to any one interested in Nats' minor league and draft activities:

SP63 - Picks are re-awarded for unsigned picks in rounds one, two, and three. In rounds one and two, they are the pick after the normal 2009 pick (in Crow's case, pick 9A ... or the tenth pick [assuming all picks 1-8 are signed]). For unsigned third round selections, teams are given a pick in the supplemental third round, a round right after the normal third round. Unsigned picks in rounds four and five are simply lost.

Let's play two!

Posted by: SlowPitch63 | July 31, 2008 9:16 AM | Report abuse

Solid homework Chico. This is the kind of work that will eventually propel you to Barry status.

Posted by: Corey | July 31, 2008 9:17 AM | Report abuse

i wish it was sorted by best to worst difference. that would be easier to read...

Posted by: longterm | July 31, 2008 9:19 AM | Report abuse

"He didn't promise to examine offensive contributions; he promised to give a breakdown of AVG differentials"

Sure, but it's not much point. A list of players sorted by weight would tell us about as much. ;)

Posted by: Chris | July 31, 2008 9:25 AM | Report abuse

Seriously? Batting Average? Seriously?

Using BA to figure offensive contributions is nearly useless. If you don't know the more advanced statistical metrics, you could have at least used OPS, which is almost a mainstream stat now anyway.

Posted by: osc | July 31, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse


Apologies if this has been pointed out already, but the Washington Nationals received yet another mention in "America's finest news source" this week:

http://tinyurl.com/6xpofk

Posted by: i hate walks | July 31, 2008 9:33 AM | Report abuse

Chico, I might have wished you used OBP or OPS instead (you're too young to be held back by the tyranny of the old-school stats), but anyway, with that said, I think the thing that strikes me most is the Guzman numbers - he's established himself pretty well as a career .260 hitter and is hitting 40 points better than that, so rather than trade him in what is clearly a career year (to say, the Dodgers, who need a shortstop), we resign him for two years, guaranteeing that when his average returns back to its career level, we'll be paying for that reduced performance as well.

Flores is a hopeful sign as is Dukes - and I'm not that upset about Zimm and Milledge - they could easily raise their average 20 points over the last two months and end up at or even a little above their career norms (or they could crater and end up 50 under).

Langerhans is sort of intriguing, too - most folks have him written off as the quintessential AAAA player, but he's always been MLB-ready defensively, it's just been a question of whether or not he'd hit enough to make it worthwhile - this year could be a small-sample-size fluke, but if he can hit .280 (and OPS .770 like he is), he's a reasonable utility guy. Hard to read that one, I think.

Posted by: Highway 295 Revisited | July 31, 2008 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Absolutely positively 100% agree. So I'll provide a link ;-)
http://farmauthority.dcsportsnet.com/

**************************************
I got the follolwing from Brian at Nationals Farm Authority (NFA). I recommend Brian and his website highly to any one interested in Nats' minor league and draft activities:

Posted by: Section 138 | July 31, 2008 9:36 AM | Report abuse

As bad as those numbers are, it sure feels worse this season. I wonder if some other metric would really get at what they're doing wrong. The number I want to see, and the one that I think may prove to be the biggest indictment of Harris as a coach, is the number of bad counts Nats hitters have started off with this season. Is there a way to get Statspass or Elias to tell you how many 0-2 counts a batter has faced in a given season? I'd love to see whether the rate of 0-2 counts on Nats hitters has increased this year, which would suggest an institutional over-eagerness or lack of patience that may not have been burdening them in past seasons.

Posted by: Deep Fried Screech | July 31, 2008 9:36 AM | Report abuse

The finger of blame has to point at upper management (mostly Bowden). A few key guys having sub par seasons, ok, bad luck. But when damn near every guy you roster stinks it up in terms of that player's norms (and the expectations were not so very high to begin with), you've chosen a bad lot. Bad luck maybe with Lastings and Dukes and Zimm, but just bad contracts to Belliard, Macowiack (only the Nats offered any real guaranteed money), LoDuca (a guy no one was in competion with the Nats to get and who could have been had for a one year deal) and Young (who is basically on the DL right now b/c he can't control his weight -- not to make little of a serious medical condition, but the guy is a diabetic and he is 60 pounds over-weight while being a professional athlete). And bad trades to get Lopez and Kearns. About a D- on the report card for team management.

Whether Lenny Harris is to blame or not, I have no idea. He can't create talent, he can only help mold it. Not sure whether he has a whole lot to work with right now. And Acta is not helping him out by doing little to create offense (few sacrifices, few hit-and-runs); and Manny's lineup card skills might not be so hot either.

Posted by: dh | July 31, 2008 9:38 AM | Report abuse

The only thing worse than being a hopeless last-place team i to be that hopeless last-place team without any apparent tradeable veterans, Nice going, JimBow.

Posted by: leetee1955 | July 31, 2008 9:43 AM | Report abuse

I know that part of Bowden's off season strategy has been to sign veterans that he hopefully would trade this time of year. He has had success with the Mike Stantons, Daryl Wards, Marlon Anderson types. I can hear the disappointment in his voice when he says that this year's crop of veterans have underachieved: Lo Duca, Estrada, Mackowiac and (Lopez and Belliard). This part of the plan has no chance when the players hit 10 to 110 points below their career averages. So what is the difference this year? I see two factors. The first is that most of these veterans have been injured and the second is the presence of Lenny Harris. (In truth, Lenny Harris may have little influence concerning how a veteran player takes an at bat.)

Having to trade Rauch to pick up a replacement for Lopez seemed to me a forced trade dictated by the regrettable performance of our current second baseman.
The heavy irony is that Rauch may be the most disposable veteran since he would only be used in games that we are ahead in the ninth inning.

Posted by: Dale | July 31, 2008 9:43 AM | Report abuse

it's difficult, but i suggest we collectively agree to hold off on hand-wringing and judgment (of the draft, at least) until the 15th. Like the veepstakes, every outward indication by all parties is likely incomplete or misdirection. Everyone knows about 8/15, so we'll look at how many signed then.

Just to further calm people, fully a third of the 1st + supplementary round picks had signed, as of a week ago. Even more are unsigned in the next few rounds, I think. A lot should happen between now and the deadline.

Posted by: nat in beantown | July 31, 2008 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Time to mix it up. Manny has become an excuse maker and a fatalist. I think he's in denial. Time for him to employ a different leadership approach. Effective leadership is situational and he has a bad situation on his hands.

Posted by: Wallpass | July 31, 2008 9:45 AM | Report abuse

"I wonder if some other metric would really get at what they're doing wrong."

You don't even have to get too hot and heavy. OPS, On-base average, slugging percentage.

It's the slugging, I'd guess, that's taken a complete nosedive. And that's indicative of Lenny's approach: Put the first strike you see into play. Page believed in waiting for the first "good" strike and whaling on it.

Posted by: Chris | July 31, 2008 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Speaking of Brian over at NFA, here's how some kids did last night:
Rhinehart 2/4, 1 2B, 1 HR, 2RBI, 1 BB
Zimmermann 5 IP, 0 ER, 2 BB, 7 K, W
Bonifacio 2/4, 1 2B, 1 SB, 1 BB, 1 RBI, 1R
King 2/3, 1 2B
Smiley 2/4, 1 3B, 1 BB, 2 RBI
And the KING of OBP:
Derek Norris 2/2, 2 BB, 1 2B
Derek's OBP this year (37 G)? .481

Posted by: Section 138 | July 31, 2008 9:46 AM | Report abuse

"Seriously? Batting Average? Seriously?

"Using BA to figure offensive contributions is nearly useless. If you don't know the more advanced statistical metrics, you could have at least used OPS, which is almost a mainstream stat now anyway."

Uhm, isn't the number one problem that the Nats are not HITTING? This is a stat measured by average, not by SLG or OPS. Either might give us further information, but our dudes are not even hitting singles, so looking at further offensive stats is starting off at Step 2 instead of Step 1.

Good Lord.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | July 31, 2008 9:47 AM | Report abuse

They should make a movie about this team and call it Major League, oh wait...Seriously, this is a nightmare season, I just want it to end. I also am praying we can somehow get rid of Flop and Lo Duca.

Posted by: Wild Thing | July 31, 2008 9:51 AM | Report abuse

i think it's fair to say they're not doing *anything* at the plate, whether it's hitting, getting on base, or slugging.

i'm not going to bash chico for using batting average, but it's really not the best metric out there for hitters. OBP is a better similar measure, since it takes into account other methods of getting on base. and OPS measures both hitting and total bases, thus power and getting on base.

Posted by: 231 | July 31, 2008 9:54 AM | Report abuse

"Uhm, isn't the number one problem that the Nats are not HITTING?"

Partially. But even if they hit more singles, they wouldn't be scoring THAT many more runs.

Good offenses don't hit singles. They walk, and they hit for extra bases.

There's less correlation between team average and runs than there is between team OBP and runs scored team SLG and runs scored.

and in the end, the goal of the game isn't to have the most hits or the highest average: it's to score the most runs.

batting average, compared to the other widely available and accepted statistics, doesn't tell you much at all.

Posted by: Chris | July 31, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

Wallpas has it right -- Manny is not a motivator nor a real strategist -- the guy is just not the right fit for this club.

Posted by: dh | July 31, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

Obviously the point is to score more runs. But if you want to have a sane analysis, you want to start basic and then become more elaborate. (hint, hint, Chico, more!)

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | July 31, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse

The number that has crippled the Nats this year is the games lost to the DL. I do find it odd that the vets averages are down while the youngsters averages are up, overall. Could it be that the kids listen to Lenny but the vets don't?

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | July 31, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Did anyone else note that FLop's Walk up tune last night was the Theme from "Shaft," and that PLod's was "Stayin' Alive"?

Was it their idea or someone else's?

Posted by: Sec 314 | July 31, 2008 9:59 AM | Report abuse

I actually would love to know what Lenny Harris is telling the batters. I suspect that Lenny is telling them to wait for "their pitch", which is pretty much tried and true baseball dogma. The problem I believe is that the advice goes about 1cm deep into the brain of some of these hitters. A young player hears Lenny saying to wait for the good strike but he SEES Guzman swinging at the first pitch and getting a .300 average. So the disconnect starts in their minds. Another problem for some of the hitters is that the umpires have wildly fluctuating ideas of where the strike zone is.

What really bothers me is seeing a pitcher who has had trouble with control getting bailed out by our hitters swinging at the first pitch. I imagine in the old days of baseball that that would not have stood well with the manager.

Posted by: Dale | July 31, 2008 10:00 AM | Report abuse

"I think the thing that strikes me most is the Guzman numbers - he's established himself pretty well as a career .260 hitter and is hitting 40 points better than that, so rather than trade him in what is clearly a career year (to say, the Dodgers, who need a shortstop), we resign him for two years, guaranteeing that when his average returns back to its career level, we'll be paying for that reduced performance as well."

I don't know about this. If you look at his career stats, throwing out 2005 and 2007 - the statistical aberrations in either direction - he's probably more of a career .280 hitter. Since people widely believed that the Nats signed a good contract with him - just two years, I don't think they really overpaid for a decent defensive SS who hits .280 with a little pop.

Posted by: #4 | July 31, 2008 10:05 AM | Report abuse

This in from Jon Heyman at SI last night/this morning:

"Tim Redding's trade value just took a dip. "Jim Bowden overplayed his hand," one NL general manager said about the Nationals GM who is said to be seeking a haul for the solid but unspectacular starter. Redding allowed 10 hits and seven runs in four innings in an 8-5 defeat to Philadelphia, a value-killer of a performance if there ever was one. Redding is 7-6 with a 4.34 ERA , not bad for the Nats. But he didn't help himself -- or Bowden -- with that outing."

Posted by: Section 138 | July 31, 2008 10:10 AM | Report abuse

Aren't these guys at the stage in their career where we want and expect them to be *improving on* their career averages? Or have we given up on them becoming stars?

This is the thing I never got when Zimm and Manny were dismissing his cold start and saying he "always starts cold" and that his numbers would be "there" at the end of the season. Well, maybe...but the question is, where is "there"? A .270 hitting 3rd baseman who doesn't walk much and hits around 20HRs is a nice complementary part when he plays defense like Ryan, but those are hardly the numbers of a guy who might lead the charge to the promised land.

I really think Zimm could benefit tremendously from some mentorship and coaching as far as his hitting is concerned--something that Frank provided him through 2006. FIRE LENNY!

* * * * *

I'm not that upset about Zimm and Milledge - they could easily raise their average 20 points over the last two months and end up at or even a little above their career norms (or they could crater and end up 50 under).

Posted by: Highway 295 Revisited | July 31, 2008 9:34 AM

Posted by: Coverage is lacking | July 31, 2008 10:10 AM | Report abuse

Firstly, having one season ruined by injury is bad luck. Have three consecutive ruined by injury is bad conditioning. These guys are out of shape. Even the kids have guts on them. I'm talking to you Ryan/Austin/Guzman.

If you don't believe Lenny Harris is terrible at his job, look at the veterans. They all dip.

Here is another factor no one examines. Slap hitting Lenny was almost acceptable in RFK with it's huge outfield. If you dinked enough balls to the outfield some would fall in because there was so much space out there. Not so the new stadium. A lot of guys last year had much better averages at home. Guys who aren't quite good enough had inflated averages at RFK. I'm talking to YOU Ryan/Dimitri/Austin. Everyone was talking about how they would hit fewer doubles and more homeruns once they left RFK. Wrong, they are hitting fewer doubles and more fly outs.

Posted by: Mythbuster | July 31, 2008 10:12 AM | Report abuse

No moves will be made today, all of our available players will clear waivers, so Bowden will wait another month to see if the contending teams up their offers.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Spell it with me now....Dmitri.
***************************************
I'm talking to YOU Ryan/Dimitri/Austin.
Posted by: Mythbuster | July 31, 2008 10:12 AM

Posted by: busting a mythbuster myth | July 31, 2008 10:15 AM | Report abuse

given the wonderfully flexible nature of my current work, I'm putting the cream and the clear on Chico's spreadsheet now. OPS lovers, hold on a bit...

Posted by: nat in beantown | July 31, 2008 10:16 AM | Report abuse

Wish Manny would say this,

"We need to pay attention to detail. We'll sit down Friday as a team and try to, not sort things out, but to make sure we play a certain way. It doesn't ever guarantee you're going to win, but you want to give yourself the best chance to win every night . . . Regardless of what our record is, we need to play a certain way. We need to play better. That's my responsibility."

Posted by: Terry Francona Quote | July 31, 2008 10:20 AM | Report abuse

Where I'm from, the first complainer is also the first volunteer to fix what's complained about ... consequently, I eagerly await links here to an OPS table for the Nats.

The kid promised an AVG table and he delivered. If you want something different, kindly take the time and effort to assemble and post it yourself.

Otherwise, please troll quietly or go away.

Seriously - from where I type, what makes being the Nats' beat reporter such a tough job isn't the team, it's the whiners in here.

I know the team sucks - it's frustrating to me, too - but to pile condescension on a kid who's just doing his job (and a pretty good one at that) reflects poorly on all of you, not him.

Posted by: Not Really Chico Harlan's Dad | July 31, 2008 10:23 AM | Report abuse

You should have seen the look on LoDuca's face when he heard about the Pudge trade.

So glad I got to see it with my own two million eyes.

Posted by: A Fly on the Wall | July 31, 2008 10:25 AM | Report abuse

given the wonderfully flexible nature of my current work, I'm putting the cream and the clear on Chico's spreadsheet now. OPS lovers, hold on a bit...

Posted by: nat in beantown | July 31, 2008 10:16 AM

**********************

Thank you twice; first for the stats, and second for making me smile.

Posted by: 3434 | July 31, 2008 10:26 AM | Report abuse

It's just like how you can tell a lot about pitchers by how they pitch when the going is really tough.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | July 31, 2008 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Man, I've been reading his name for two years now, and never spotted he spelt it that way.

Posted by: Mythbuster | July 31, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Given his brother Delmon, I'm assuming his parents are into unconventional names.

Posted by: 3434 | July 31, 2008 10:32 AM | Report abuse

i hate walks

That graph is great

Posted by: NatsFanMA | July 31, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse

506,

Not to get into a stats-debate, but looking a BA isn't "basic." It's wrong-headed. The key factor to scoring runs isn't hitting safely - it's getting on base, anyway you can be it by hit, walk, error, hit-by-pitch, whatever. The key to driving those runs in is hitting for extra bases - that's why OBP and SLG correlate more closely to run-scoring than BA.

BA tells you how many singles a batter is hitting, but it leaves out lots of other stuff and so can lead to a misleading conclusion. For instance, you look at NJ's BA on this chart, and it says he was hitting 50 points below average, and you think "Jeez, he was terrible even before he got hurt." Then you look at his on-base percentage, which was .415 this year - about 20 points BETTER than his career of .396. So, in actuality, while he wasn't hitting much, he was getting on base MORE frequently than average, so on the whole, even while not hitting for average, he was actually accomplishing the first part of run-scoring ("get on base") better than in previous years.

The same applies to Guzman in reverse - his .303 BA looks impressive on the face of it, and it is, 40 points better than his career average, but then you look at his OBP (.333) and his SLG (.415), and they are up by more or less the same amount, 40 points over average. So while this means that he too is getting on base more often, which is good, he's basically doing it by slapping a few more singles, and even with that, he's nowhere near the pace NJ was on. Moreover, with that OBP at .333, he's actually getting on base at less of a rate than Belliard, Dukes, Langerhans, and Harris. So while that "40 points above career batting average" looks impressive, when you compare in full measure with other folks, it's maybe not as impressive as it seems at first glance.

That's why looking at BA isn't really "Step 1" - it's a step in the wrong direction, towards a conclusion that isn't quite right.

Posted by: Highway 295 Revisited | July 31, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Or they are as bad at spelling as I am!

Posted by: Mythbuster | July 31, 2008 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Man, give a guy a copy of Moneyball and he thinks he knows everything about baseball. Where's Good Will Hunting when you need him? No stat tells the whole story. They all give info on one specific aspect of how a guys is hitting. Guzman also has more RBI's than most. You don't get those by walking, because a walk doesn't score the guy on second or third. Sure avg doesn't tell you everything, but if your are smart, you can analyse stats for what they are.

Thanks for the good work Chico. This is good stuff as usual.

Posted by: EternalExpo | July 31, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Don't be ridiculous, EternalExpo. For Guz to hit in guys from second and third, we'd have to actually PUT guys on second and third.

It works in theory, though... I suppose...

Posted by: 3434 | July 31, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

You know what the difference is between hitting .250 and hitting .300? I got it figured out.

Twenty-five hits a year in 500 at bats is 50 points. Okay? There's 6 months in a season, that's about 25 weeks--you get one extra flare a week--just one--a gork, a ground ball with eyes, a dying quail--just one more dying quail a week and you're in Yankee Stadium!

Posted by: Crash Davis | July 31, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

it's not all about moneyball. a hit is better than a walk, for sure. but i think the point people were trying to make is that batting average measures less than any of the other stats mentioned. and by itself, has less value than any of the other stats.

again, not bashing chico, just pointing out (or really, agreeing and elaborating) that average is the least useful (especially in a vacuum) stat on hitting when compared with OBP or OPS. it tells the smallest part of the story.

btw, guzman has more RBIs than most... what? other nationals? other players? most what?

Posted by: 231 | July 31, 2008 10:58 AM | Report abuse

and you don't *normally* get RBIs by walking, but it does happen. statistically insignificant, for sure, but it happen. and OBP measures hits (along w/walks, HBP, etc), so it's not like it leaves out RBI opportunities. and SLG measures extra base hits, which are more likely to garner RBIs than singles, thus making OPS as good of a single simple hitting metric as we have.

Posted by: 231 | July 31, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse

I've said it before and I'll say it again. After watching video of Crow's delivery, there can be no doubt that he has major arm trouble in his future barring a drastic change in his mechanics. Maybe the Nationals braintrust has finally come around to that fact.

Posted by: Doctor Joe | July 31, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Crash, someone already posted that quote yesterday...

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 11:02 AM | Report abuse

Ouch. Good point about runners. He got those 30 odd rbi's from somewhere though.

And to clarify, of course I meant more than other Nat's. Only Flores has more. If you factor in other teams he has less than the average batboy, and slightly fewer than some of the more gifted peanut sellers!

Posted by: EternalExpo | July 31, 2008 11:03 AM | Report abuse

231's got my point. As for RBI's, Guzman's also got 100+ more ABs than the next closest Nat, so might that possibly be why he's got more RBI's than most (and even with that huge AB advantage, he's 10 RBIs behind Flores and only one ahead of Milledge). Expo, you're totally right - one stat doesn't tell the whole story. For instance, when looking at RBI's, you should consider how many ABs a player has had.

Posted by: Highway 295 Revisited | July 31, 2008 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Lets see if I was a bett'n man, I'd lay odds that its 1M to 1 that JIMBO pulls anything off today (other then his hmmmm, cloths).

For all the Kool-Aiders out there, unless the creator himself shoots a lightning bolt directly at the Lerner-Stans bald pallets and scrambled their brains, this is what DC has to look forward to for a long time. Endless spin by PTBowdoin about building a championship team, mindless Manny waxing poetic about youth and inexperience, scrap-heep 4AAA'ers, public reclamation projects, and over-the-hill journeymen retreads looking to work for cheap.

Enough already!
-sign your draft picks
-let FLOP/MEAT/LOPUKA/AYALLA go
-open the checkbook

Posted by: Tippy Canoe | July 31, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

"I've said it before and I'll say it again. After watching video of Crow's delivery, there can be no doubt that he has major arm trouble in his future barring a drastic change in his mechanics. Maybe the Nationals braintrust has finally come around to that fact."

Is there anyone out there who can confirm/deny this? Perhaps Doctor Bob? Or Doctor Ed? Because if it's true, not signing Crow would give us two top 10 picks next year and legitimate "we don't cave and sign EVERYONE" leverage, both of which sound pretty good to me.

Posted by: 3434 | July 31, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

I thought this was posted here during the draft, but maybe not. The websites I've seen tend to be mostly pessimistic on Crow's mechanics. There are two issues -

1. Some folks are concerned about the "wrist wrap" - that he wraps his hand/wrist around the ball after he takes it out of his glove. Other folks seem to think that's no problem whatsoever

2. Other folks are far more concerned about the position of his elbows in relation to his shoulders as he drives towards home plate.

A couple of tinyurl's on it:

http://tinyurl.com/6hynlm - Chris O'Leary -negative outlook

http://tinyurl.com/5tad3u - Saber Scouting - more positive, focuses on "wrist wrap" issue

http://drivelinemechanics.com/2008/04/06/quick-note-aaron-crow/ - tends to side with O'leary

Posted by: Highway 295 Revisited | July 31, 2008 11:19 AM | Report abuse

if injuries were a concern that would have been known and addressed way ahead of time. this sounds like a ploy. otherwise we would have drafted smoak.

Posted by: longterm | July 31, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Did we just promise $16 mil to a lifetime .263 hitter? Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice...errr...don't fool me again.

Heyman is (subtly) Bowden bashing again:
"Tim Redding's trade value just took a dip. "Jim Bowden overplayed his hand,'' one NL general manager said about the Nationals GM who is said to be seeking a haul for the solid but unspectacular starter. Redding allowed 10 hits and seven runs in four innings in an 8-5 defeat to Philadelphia, a value-killer of a performance if there ever was one. Redding is 7-6 with a 4.34 ERA , not bad for the Nats. But he didn't help himself -- or Bowden -- with that outing."

Posted by: 756* | July 31, 2008 11:25 AM | Report abuse

ummm... pretty much finished, but can't seem to post it to my personal web space. Does someone (Chico? WaPo web admin?) have the ability to post the excel file publicly? I'll email it. Either that, or I can post the executive summary in the comments.

And for the record, I think two things about Chico's effort here:
(1) his job is to cover and to stir interest/conversation in the Nats. To the extent that this inspired a fan (me) to carry it another step, he's done his job fine. (Plus, he did this after filing two games stories last night).
(2) he may have stopped at BA because getting this deep into the Nats stats makes you want to shoot yourself.

Posted by: nat in beantown | July 31, 2008 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Agreed. I bet he wishes he could've gotten the Pirates beat.
*******************************
he may have stopped at BA because getting this deep into the Nats stats makes you want to shoot yourself.
Posted by: nat in beantown | July 31, 2008 11:26 AM

Posted by: Section 138 | July 31, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Thank you nat in beantown! You can post it on Google Documents to be viewed externally if you have a gmail account.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 11:35 AM | Report abuse

nat in beantown - i'll be glad to post it for you. email to

spam at help2go dot com

Posted by: Osc | July 31, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

What I don't understand is why they are talking about extension talks with Redding right now. It is not a bad idea, but why does Bowden like to sign players to longer term deals right as he fails to trade them? Is he covering up his failure with other news?

Posted by: Positively Half St | July 31, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

extension for redding? another meat loaf/belliard hard to move contract? fire jimbow NOW!

Posted by: natsscribe | July 31, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

Here's a fuller, sortable version of the chart in the post above, including age, OBP, SLG, and OPS. (Some of the career OBP numbers are a tiny bit off for the vets, as I had trouble finding good PA data). It's currently sorted by DIFF in OPS:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pfhbBNE3AudVIR61aAAz5dQ&hl=en

I'll let smarter people make better inferences, but no one will be surprised by the six players with the largest falloff in OPS:

Estrada (-0.353)
Mackowiak (-0.270)
Pena (-0.269)
Kearns (-0.180)
Lo Duca (-0.168)
Lopez (-0.110)

Posted by: nat in beantown | July 31, 2008 11:54 AM | Report abuse

Using batting average was a mistake. You know who leads this team in walks? Nick Johnson. The inability to draw walks is a huge problem, and Lennie Harris's inability to get his batters to work the count is the biggest reason why he should be fired.

OBP would have been better. OPS even more so.

Posted by: Tank | July 31, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

**one other quick note: Most stats are pulled from baseball-reference.com, which is user-supported by $15 sponsorships of individual player stat sheets.

As of this morning, Mr. William Charles Harris's page had no sponsor. I trust that will be remedied today.

Posted by: nat in beantown | July 31, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Have the vets really "underachieved?" That's Bowden spin -- translation: don't blame me for their poor play.

Posted by: ohplease | July 31, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Uhm, ohplease, what is your definition of underachieve? Clearly not putting up numbers significantly less than their other seasons and career norms. No, that's Bowden spin, right?

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | July 31, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

i think the numbers make a pretty good case that most of the veterans have underachieved. it may be fair to say you expected some of them to, but it's not fair to say you expected them *all* to.

Posted by: 231 | July 31, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

+ 1/2 St, do you have a link?
**********************************
What I don't understand is why they are talking about extension talks with Redding right now.
Posted by: Positively Half St | July 31, 2008 11:44 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 12:21 PM | Report abuse

How about a bonifide hitting coach? Where on earth did we get this guy. Old story from Senators II. It was this time of year and the Redskins were still working out at the Flats. The Nats were in town and Jurgensen was farting around in the stadium with Chris Hanburger and Lenny Haus. Sonny was in the cage taking BP with Hondo and was doing a decent job hitting warning track fly balls. Teddy Ballgame comes out of the dugout and yells "Jurgy, what in the hell are you trying to do?" With 2 quick hand-placement suggestions, Ted Williams had Sonny Jurgensen hitting the baseball out of the park. My point being that a guy who knows hitting should be telling others how to do it. That includes, as mentioned above, how to work the count.

Posted by: 6th and D | July 31, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

Griffey goes to the White Sox....

This is the kind of deal that teams with major league talent can do...

Posted by: Fisch Fry | July 31, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

Time to mix it up. Manny has become an excuse maker and a fatalist. I think he's in denial.

Posted by: Wallpass | July 31, 2008 9:45 AM

Can you actually be both a fatalist (resigned to one's situation) and in denial???

Posted by: MountieNatsFan | July 31, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

So the Twinkies want to unload Boof Bonser, and they need a 2b, 3b, and relief pitching. We'll give you Felipe and thrown in Ayala or Colome for good measure. You give us Boof.

I know this is about as silly as it gets, but what the hey....each team wants to unload each. I'll flip Lopez for a 26 y.o. pitcher - it's better than outright releasing him.

Posted by: Corey | July 31, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Statistics are like bikinis. They show a lot, but never everything.

Posted by: Lou Piniella | July 31, 2008 12:43 PM | Report abuse

nat in beantown, this is amazing. Thanks for the leg work!

Posted by: 3434 | July 31, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

given the wonderfully flexible nature of my current work, I'm putting the cream and the clear on Chico's spreadsheet now. OPS lovers, hold on a bit...

Posted by: nat in beantown | July 31, 2008 10:16 AM

I've got iced tea all over my desk from reading that one, Beantown! Oh, you make me miss Boston, where humor seems abnormally high! Great work on the stats. Thanks!

Posted by: flynnie | July 31, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

So, all of you who want a veteran slugger, with Griffey now traded, he'll probably not re-sign with the Reds and the Tigers sure won't keep him for anything longer than a few years. How would he look in Southeast, in your opinion?

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | July 31, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Slow

Posted by: Answer to Section 506 | July 31, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Someone wrote that Belliard's contract was a mistake, but I'm not sure where that is coming from. He is relatively cheap in the marketplace for a veteran. Not sure that contract should be added to the list of mistakes. Young's contract certainly seems ill-advised now, but then again the mistake could have been much worse. They gave him a 2 year extension. And at the time it seemed like he deserved it.

I defended the LoDucca deal as sound protection against the likelihood that Flores needed time, but that was clearly a poor investment as was Estrada.

I defended the Lopez deal, but I was wrong. That was a huge mistake - more team wise than money wise.

It is in vogue to criticise the Detwiller selection now. I think it is a little too early to panic on that one and regardless, he was the right risk to take with that pick.

Pena screwed himself, the Nationals, and the fans by hiding the shoulder pain.

I'm not in the fire Bowden camp. But I am in the stregthen the team with select free agents camp. Sacrifice some money and a draft pick for a Type A Free Agent hitter and then add a Type B hitter as well. The youth movement has reached the stage of evolution where leadership is appropriate.

Posted by: NatBisquit | July 31, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Anyone have any tips on where to find the chat transcript from yesterday?

Posted by: Steven on Capitol Hill | July 31, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

...506, did you write that?

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse

No, but whoever did is a genius.

I don't like the idea of Griffey here, but I was wondering what other people thought, since he's like the Livan of outfielders.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | July 31, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

no thanks on griffey. if we're going to sign a big name, let's sign one who's a little closer to the apex of his career instead of one playing out the string.

besides, we won't have a playoff team in DC in the next year or two, so why would a guy at the end of his career seeking a ring want to come here? i could see a guy who wanted to help build something and planned on being here 4-6 years, but not a guy in the vicinity of 40.

Posted by: 231 | July 31, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse

I dunno, but people were seriously talking about Bonds.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | July 31, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

well... wasn't me talkin bout bonds... ;)

Posted by: 231 | July 31, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

I still say we should sign Bonds. We're the only team in the NL for which it would make sense. Bonds would put fannies in seats. He might even introduce the team to the African-American community. He can't hurt the team chemistry. Whatever it costs to bring him in, I'm sure the Nats would recoup in ticket/concession sales. I'm not sure that any other team would be able to say that.

Posted by: Fisch Fry | July 31, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

I can't find a good non-subsriber website that has sortable OPS+ for MLB SS this year. Suggestions?

In criticizing the Guzman signing, Sheinin noted his OPS+ is 96, and said we could have gotten a major league average SS for less rather than locking in the Guz. I wonder about that. Notwithstanding Hanley / JRoll / Reyes, isn't SS a below average offensive position? The relevant comparison would be the OPS+ of obtainable SS.

Also, I think it is fair to point out that there is an obvious medical reason for his hitting to have gotten better - improved vision (eye surgery) - to suggest this may not be a 1 year wonder. He hit this way for the 1/4 season he was healthy in 2007, which was also post surgery. He is still not old (30).

Does anyone know of a good salary estimator? I used the one on Hardball Times, and if I did it right, it suggests G-Man is actually underpaid at $8 million if he keeps up his performance (It is based on win shares above bench and status as pre-arb / arb eligible / FA). Any help would be appreciated and fun to look at.

Posted by: PTBNL | July 31, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

From ESPN.com chat:

Jason (Joliet, IL): Jim, A radio station in Chicago is reporting the Sox may be getting John Lannan from the Nats. What do you think of Lannan and would this be a good move? Thanks!

SportsNation Jim Callis: (1:20 PM ET ) Really? Lannan is decent, not a high ceiling but he's a low-cost, effective starting pitcher. Not sure why the Nats would want to trade him or what the Sox would give them to make it worth their while.

Posted by: RH | July 31, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

just looking back at this past winter's free agent class

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2007/03/2008_mlb_free_a.html

and there was nothing there. belliard and dmitri signings made sense. and were fairly priced, not that i particularly care about that but it does show level headed thinking cause i'm sure we have a budget even if MLB doesn't.

looks like it was updated in January so i'm sure some of the good stuff was taken already. but each year teams are more and more focused on youth and development. more players are signing extensions. prospects are more valuable. all this collided at the exact worst time for our nats. still, on the whole the minors has seen massive improvement across the board.

upcoming year will be more of the same though...

but i bet there will be much less worrying about Elijah Dukes potential here. healthy zimmerman, flores, dukes, and we can start to worry about bonaficio's obp. that will be major progress. of course so would signing some of this...

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2007/12/2009-mlb-free-a.html

Posted by: longterm | July 31, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

The argument for Bonds (and for Griffey as well, I suppose) revolves around the fact that it will shut up a lot of the complainers. It counts as a big-name free agent signing, but it doesn't break the bank (assuming Barry is actually willing to play for minimum wage, which I highly doubt). It might put a little pop or patience into our lineup--even at 40+, those guys are better at the plate than just about anyone on this team. And it will put butts in the seats. Fans will show up at Nats park and tune in at home to see THE Barry Bonds (or Ken Griffey, Jr.) play for the home team... even if they're only going to boo and throw needles on the field.

Posted by: 3434 | July 31, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Bonus Points for anyone that actually knows what a "gork" is.

And Christian Guzman has 1 walk in 81 career plate appearances with the bases loaded. He has a batting average of .301 and an OBP of .288 - add the BB, 1 Sac Hit (SQUEEZE!) and 6 sac flys.

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | July 31, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

manny question for ya: the pirates want the marlins players. the marlins want an outfielder. why dont the marlins just do a straight up trade with the pirates for jason bay. hes got the same stats as manny. hes six years younger and a whole lot less expensive. why trade away good players for 2 months of manny when they can have bay long term?

Posted by: dk | July 31, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse

"It counts as a big-name free agent signing, but it doesn't break the bank (assuming Barry is actually willing to play for minimum wage, which I highly doubt)."

Bonds would be willing to play for $1. No one has offered him contract, let alone a minimum wage one. It's not like he's holding out right now mulling over various offers.

Having said that, it's not a good idea to sign him. What's the upside? A slightly improved offense for a team going nowhere. What's the downside? Taking away ABs from younger players and tarnishing the reputation of the franchise. What signal are you sending that Class A prospect who might make the big leagues if he hit 10 more HRs? Steroids are OK?

Posted by: #4 | July 31, 2008 1:50 PM | Report abuse

"Bonds...He can't hurt the team chemistry."

What? Are you saying this team is ALREADY juicing? Geez, it's doing no more good for these guys than it did for Nook Logan!

Posted by: Ray King's Gut Feeling | July 31, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Ho-Hum

Just think last year on this day we could have traded, Cordero, DaMeat and Belliard..

Look where we are today....

Posted by: Broncos7 | July 31, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

If anyone has watched any Reds game, Griffey can't field anymore.

I also wanted to point out that AK is hitting .228 since his return, so those of you who were completely sure that his poor performance early in the season was a result of "nine bonechips" (that he didn't tell anyone about until six weeks into the season) floating around in his arm may want to come up with another excuse.

Posted by: natty bo | July 31, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

I'm listening to that radio station right now (670 The Score). It seems waaaay off the wall, and a rumor just started by a fan.

***************************************

From ESPN.com chat:

Jason (Joliet, IL): Jim, A radio station in Chicago is reporting the Sox may be getting John Lannan from the Nats. What do you think of Lannan and would this be a good move? Thanks!

SportsNation Jim Callis: (1:20 PM ET ) Really? Lannan is decent, not a high ceiling but he's a low-cost, effective starting pitcher. Not sure why the Nats would want to trade him or what the Sox would give them to make it worth their while.

Posted by: RH | July 31, 2008 1:36 PM

Posted by: Section 138 | July 31, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Chico Harlan, please call your office . . .

From Jon Heyman at si.com:

1:49 p.m.
The Mets are talking to the Nationals about a deal for reliever Luis Ayala, SI.com has learned. GM Omar Minaya badly wants a reliever. He also wouldn't mind making a deal. This could be it.

Posted by: WebberDC | July 31, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

"Bonds...He can't hurt the team chemistry."

What? Are you saying this team is ALREADY juicing? Geez, it's doing no more good for these guys than it did for Nook Logan!

Posted by: Ray King's Gut Feeling | July 31, 2008 1:51 PM

----------------

No no no, it's because of our oval locker room! It was designed specifically with Barry Bonds in mind.

(Also, I was not advocating a Bonds pickup. I was just saying why other people have done that.)

Posted by: 3434 | July 31, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Obviously depends what they get, but dealing Ayala right is a sell low proposition. Although he's struggled this year, I'm betting at this time next year, he's regained in 2005 form.

Posted by: #4 | July 31, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Using Baseball-reference's Play Index, I created a list of players with 350 or more ABs who've played 50% of their games at SS. Here's the list of 16 players sorted in descending order of OPS+ - Guzman is 9th out of sixteen, below Yunel Escobar and above Miggy Tejada.

http://www.bb-ref.com/pi/shareit/beVy

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | July 31, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

You are crazy.

RISP:

Manny - .968 OPS
J. Bay - .652 OPS

Yankees fans are drooling at the prospect of the Sox swapping Manny for Bay.

***************************************
manny question for ya: the pirates want the marlins players. the marlins want an outfielder. why dont the marlins just do a straight up trade with the pirates for jason bay. hes got the same stats as manny. hes six years younger and a whole lot less expensive. why trade away good players for 2 months of manny when they can have bay long term?

Posted by: RH | July 31, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

I repeat, Chico Harlan, please call you office . . .

From Jon Heyman at si.com:

2:01 p.m.
The White Sox are talking about a deal for Nationals pitcher John Lannan, SI.com has learned. The Sox have been looking to add a pitcher since Jose Contreras suffered an injury recently.

Posted by: WebberDC | July 31, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Haha Jimmy is probably asking F-Mart for Ayala. We'll be lucky to get season tickets for Shea Stadium next year for Ayala right now - still, deal him...make some space.

I can't believe Lannan and the White Sox aren't getting more play from the constituency.


**also, I hope those view the Shea Stadium comment with the sarcasm it was intended

Posted by: Corey | July 31, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Why is Bowden even talking to Heyman? Sounds like it's Bowden or someone from the Nats' org, since the posts were consecutive and 12 minutes apart...

Posted by: 756* | July 31, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

In 114's table, the average OPS+ is 96.75. At 96, Guz is technically below average, but I think it would be more accurate to say he's just about exactly average offensively for a shortstop.

This is definitely a career season for him, and only time will tell whether the real reason for that is the eye surgery, or it's just a fluke.

Posted by: 3434 | July 31, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse

My job is on the line, I have to make my Lerner overlords believe I am actually attempting to do my job, regardless of how ham-handed and ineffective it might be.

Posted by: (fake) Jim Bowden | July 31, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Chicago Radio station says it would take swisher or more for Lannan.

Hanrahan just mentioned as well as a potential target.

They put Hanrahan over Lannan, but looking.

Posted by: Section 138 | July 31, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

If Bowden trades Lannan, even I will sign Steven's Glorious Self-Indulgent Petition (TM)

That's why no one is talking about it, because the deal is too incredibly dumb for any words.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | July 31, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

What is the value on a rookie pitcher with a 3.33 ERA. It's a lot higher than Nick Swisher, period.

Posted by: Jason | July 31, 2008 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Ayalla to the Mets? Fantastic! Omar your a f'n genuius. Nothing better then watch'n the amazins crumble under the pressure of another September race to the wire!

For all who care, if this goes thru the baord operator on WFAN will probably need 10 hands to hanlde the crush of disgruntled callers.

Posted by: Tippy Canoe | July 31, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

I agree 100%. I'm just tuned into the station, and passing it along, since we can't get info from Mr. Harlan.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What is the value on a rookie pitcher with a 3.33 ERA. It's a lot higher than Nick Swisher, period.

Posted by: Jason | July 31, 2008 2:12 PM

Posted by: Section 138 | July 31, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

I'm with Section 506 on the petition thing, if they trade Lannan. I also agree with everybody that it would be nice to hear from Chico or anyone from the Post as to what's going on, even if only to pass on rumors like these. My understanding is that this Internet thing can be updated regularly.

Posted by: baltova | July 31, 2008 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Just hypothetically, if we managed to deal Hanrahan, who would close? Colome??

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 2:16 PM | Report abuse

I also agree with everybody that it would be nice to hear from Chico or anyone from the Post as to what's going on, even if only to pass on rumors like these. My understanding is that this Internet thing can be updated regularly.

Posted by: baltova | July 31, 2008 2:16 PM

---------------------

I disagree. I'm happy getting my rumors from the NJ community. From Chico, I prefer only reliable, substantiated claims. He shouldn't concern himself with meaningless radio chatter.

Posted by: 3434 | July 31, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

I'd prefer if Chico kept out of reporting unsubstantiated rumors, actually. There are so many lies flying around at the trade deadline that I see no reason to freak about them.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | July 31, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

I would think Saul would get the first shot (if this Chicago rumor is anywhere near true, and Hanrahan gets traded).

Posted by: Section 138 | July 31, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Agreed - let Chico be the beat reporter and not post unsubstantiated rumors in here - the NJ community collectively can cover more ground than a single man.

The 4PM deadline is now 99 minutes away. I can wait for the official release when and if anything happens. Chico - we want a new post by 4:15.

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | July 31, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

John Heyman reporting: The White Sox are talking about a deal for Nationals pitcher John Lannan, SI.com has learned. The Sox have been looking to add a pitcher since Jose Contreras suffered an injury recently.

Unless they get a boatload of equal A level prospects/MLB ready types this is another JIMBO fiasco

Posted by: Tippy Canoe | July 31, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Lannan to the White Sox?

Jon Heyman mentioned this rumor on si.com at 2:01 PM.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/jon_heyman/07/29/heyman.tradeblog/index.html?eref=T1

Posted by: shepdave | July 31, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Just for sake of argument, if it's so bad to report unsubstantiated rumors, why is Sports Illustrated's baseball columnist doing it?

Posted by: baltova | July 31, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

"Just hypothetically, if we managed to deal Hanrahan, who would close? Colome??"

You have to win games in order to close games. zing!

Posted by: 756* | July 31, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Folks, John Lannan is a nice pitcher, but he's not Johan Santana. Let's see what they get in return before we automatically say it's a bad deal. In order to get a good power hitter or power hitting prospect, they need to give up something. Trading Lannan would be dealing from strength. I also happen to believe that long term he's a #3 or 4 starter at best. We would be selling high here.

Posted by: #4 | July 31, 2008 2:29 PM | Report abuse

#4 (is this in honor of Earl Weaver?), you've got me rethinking this. Let's do a pile of assuming: Ballester keeps looking good, Jordan Zimmermann comes up and looks good, Redding and Bergman keep doing okay and the Nats spring for a free agent starter. Maybe Shawn Hill comes back. Lannan becomes expendable and, if you get a quality everyday hitter for him, that might not be a bad deal. At least worth considering and, by the way, I love Lannan. It just depends what you can get for him.

Posted by: baltova | July 31, 2008 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Just for sake of argument, if it's so bad to report unsubstantiated rumors, why is Sports Illustrated's baseball columnist doing it?

Posted by: baltova | July 31, 2008 2:27 PM

----------------------

Oh, I'm certainly not saying it's BAD. Goodness knows these rumors liven up my work day. I just think there are better things Chico could be doing with his time. I have different expectations from SI and the Post beat writer. Reporting rumors isn't part of Chico's job, as far as I'm concerned.

Posted by: 3434 | July 31, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

ESPN 890 in Boston which is a second fiddle to powerhouse WEEI is reporting that with the Marlins deal dead Theo has offered Manny to the White Sox for Ken Griffey and would pay the 7 million left on Manny's contract.

Posted by: Jason | July 31, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

Hanrahan and Lannan to the South Side? Anyone have any info on these guys? Why would a rebuilding team trade young guys?

Posted by: WindyCity | July 31, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

I've gotta agree with others, Chico. Why am I hearing about the Lannan situation from Tim Kurkjian on ESPNNews and then nothing on NJ. Schmuck has hourly O's updates (not much to say but at least we know he's on the job) on his new Sun Blog. I'm new to this blog thing but I think we need to be thrown a few bones on important days like this. Seems like that's supposed to be the point of this thing.

Posted by: CharlottesvilleNat | July 31, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

If Lannan could be flipped for a solid major league bat, it's worthy of consideration. If it's for Jerry Owens and a low level arm, not so much.

Posted by: Brian | July 31, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Oh, I'm certainly not saying it's BAD. Goodness knows these rumors liven up my work day. I just think there are better things Chico could be doing with his time. I have different expectations from SI and the Post beat writer. Reporting rumors isn't part of Chico's job, as far as I'm concerned.
-------------
3434, fair point, I just wish we saw a little more from Chico and the Post in general. As one of the 9,000, I'd like to feel less alone.

Posted by: baltova | July 31, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

I get it now.... when Manny says that the Nats haven't hit rock bottom - I understand now.

Tomorrow, when the Nats no longer have Lannan, Ayala and Hanrahan, that will be rock bottom.

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | July 31, 2008 2:40 PM | Report abuse

Just for sake of argument, if it's so bad to report unsubstantiated rumors, why is Sports Illustrated's baseball columnist doing it?

Posted by: baltova | July 31, 2008 2:27 PM

----------------------

Oh, I'm certainly not saying it's BAD. Goodness knows these rumors liven up my work day. I just think there are better things Chico could be doing with his time. I have different expectations from SI and the Post beat writer. Reporting rumors isn't part of Chico's job, as far as I'm concerned.

Posted by: 3434 | July 31, 2008 2:34 PM

1. Um, Heyman's reports both say that they "learned" about each "rumor." How does that fit into anyone's definition of "unsubstantiated?" I'm pretty sure Heyman or his intern "learned" the rumors from people Heyman trusts.

2. It's not Chico's job to report on potential trades of the Nats on deadline day, reported by other reputable news outlets, when he is the Nats beat writer for the hometown paper? Really? I do not think Chico would agree.

Posted by: WebberDC | July 31, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

It'd be kinda nice to have a #3 or #4 starter, especially when we don't have a #1 or a #2.

Posted by: Wes Mantooth | July 31, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

"Folks, John Lannan is a nice pitcher, but he's not Johan Santana."

---Which is why we wouldn't get 4 prospects for him.


"If Lannan could be flipped for a solid major league bat, it's worthy of consideration. If it's for Jerry Owens and a low level arm, not so much."

---Oh, reminisce. We had Jerry Owens once, remember? He was traded for Alex "not Rodriguez" Escobar. Someone like LaPorta would have been nice. Gamel anyone? Shoot, wrong team.


"ESPN 890 in Boston which is a second fiddle to powerhouse WEEI is reporting that with the Marlins deal dead Theo has offered Manny to the White Sox for Ken Griffey and would pay the 7 million left on Manny's contract."

---OH MY GOD! IT'S A FIRE...SALE!!!

Posted by: 756* | July 31, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

It's the STRASBURG EXPRESS!!!

Posted by: Choo Choo!! | July 31, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

"It's not Chico's job to report on potential trades of the Nats on deadline day, reported by other reputable news outlets, when he is the Nats beat writer for the hometown paper? Really? I do not think Chico would agree."

You are right! Chico should scoop a story himself (for once).

Posted by: 756* | July 31, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

By the way, if Bay is avaiable and we're thinking about trading Lannan, hopefully we're in the bidding there. I go with Lannan plus Kearns for Bay. Time to bring Bay back into the fold (then we'll work on getting back Grady Sizemore, Cliff Lee, Brandon Phillips, Soriano...)

Posted by: baltova | July 31, 2008 2:44 PM | Report abuse

Lannan + Kearns + what?

Lannan + Kearns won't get you a return phone call

Posted by: (fake) Pirates GM | July 31, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Is it too late to trade Alex Escobat back to the White Sox for Jerry Owens?

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | July 31, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

Nothing from Heyman in 40 minutes. Heyman! Hey Man! Wake the F up!

Posted by: 756* | July 31, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

Hanrahan still "just rumored" to be going to the Sox per 680 The Score in Chicago.

Posted by: Section 138 | July 31, 2008 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Re: John Lannan is no Johan Santana

True, but he is an Ervin Santana.

Player VORP Rank
Johan Santana 37.3 10
Ervin Santana 27.6 28
John Lannan 27.1 29

Posted by: Tom Servo | July 31, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Heyman is a tool. Not like a jerky loser, like literally being used by others to accomplish a purpose. His sources tell him things that he reports, perhaps because it's what they want, or perhaps because they want news to get out there on the market.

Really, do you think GMs call someone like Heyman because they're so excited, they just can't hide it? No, a leak is always made to accomplish something. Chico doesn't need to be making himself part of the game like that.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | July 31, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

I love (READ: Hate) this caption on ESPN:

"If Manny and Junior both are traded, that's 1,118 homers moving."


It should read, if Manny and Felipe are traded, that's 989 groundballs not run out being traded!

Posted by: 756* | July 31, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

"I also wanted to point out that AK is hitting .228 since his return"

odd, when i look at the game log on ESPN, it shows he's hitting 259 since his return. 337 OBP, 407 SLG, 744 OPS.

not that 260 is awesome, or anything... but it's still 31 points higher than the number you posted.

where are your stats coming from, natty bo?

Posted by: 231 | July 31, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

his name is ColomB. not Colome. learn it.
or the LColome.
------------------

Just hypothetically, if we managed to deal Hanrahan, who would close? Colome??

Posted by: | July 31, 2008 2:16 PM

Posted by: theraph | July 31, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

"#4 (is this in honor of Earl Weaver?)"

You nailed it. Oriole hater, but a Weaver admirer.

Posted by: #4 | July 31, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

Okay, Lannan + Kearns + a prospect. I would point out that Lannan would become the Pirates' best starter (ERA's better than anybody they've got and he's more wins than all but one guy) plus Kearns is hitting .259, basically his career number, in the last month since coming back. Let's see what the Pirates actually get for Bay.

Posted by: baltova | July 31, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

btw, ESPN's rumors on nats players (nothing new here).

The Chicago White Sox have expressed interest in Washington Nationals' left-hander John Lannan, WSCR Radio of Chicago reports.

Though Tim Redding's name has popped up in some trade rumors, a source close to the starter told the Washington Post that the team has actually already initiated preliminary discussions regarding a possible contract extension.
Shortstop Felipe Lopez, starter Tim Redding and catcher Paul Lo Duca have been involved in recent trade rumors, but there is little chance any of them get traded.

Lopez might actually be designated for assignment, while Redding (veteran starter)and Lo Duca (filling in at first base) are currently filling team needs.

Posted by: 231 | July 31, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Glad to see others talking about the Lannan rumor. I'm feeling just like I would in a 5-4, bottom of the 9th, bases loaded, 1 out, against the Braves, with Cordero on the mound situation. I can't look until it is over, and I am nervous as anything.

Lannan might only be a #3 or #4 starter, but he is only 23 years old and has many years ahead of him. We will need a #3 starter for the 3rd game of the NLDS, NLCS and/or World Series. Even if it takes 10 years (G-d forbid!), he'll still be fairly young.

If this goes through, I swear that I will help stage a protest in support/demanding Bowden's firing, possibly going straight to Kasten (I know how to get in touch with him that doesn't involve going through the Nats).

62 more minutes...

Posted by: LurkerNowPoster | July 31, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Sounds like it might not be Lannan to the White Sox but actually Joel Hanrahan

Posted by: MLBTradeRumors | July 31, 2008 3:00 PM | Report abuse

"I'm feeling just like I would in a 5-4, bottom of the 9th, bases loaded, 1 out, against the Braves, with Cordero on the mound situation. I can't look until it is over, and I am nervous as anything."

...and Chipper Jones is up to bat.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | July 31, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

From today's Nats Notebook: Bowden sez, "So I never look to trade pitching. That being said, if there was a three-, four-hole future hitter or a shortstop up the middle long-term, we're always looking for that."

OK, does that mean that Bonifacio will be hitting in the 5 hole next year? Jimbo - if you never look to trade pitching, why are toady's rumors centered on Lannan and Hanrahan?

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | July 31, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

Maybe the Nats are afraid of the ramifications of a bench clearing brawl tonight if Lannan was to hit Utley and Break Howard's wrist....

Posted by: Broncos7 | July 31, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

"From today's Nats Notebook: Bowden sez, "So I never look to trade pitching. That being said, if there was a three-, four-hole future hitter or a shortstop up the middle long-term, we're always looking for that."

OK, does that mean that Bonifacio will be hitting in the 5 hole next year? Jimbo - if you never look to trade pitching, why are toady's rumors centered on Lannan and Hanrahan?"
__________________________________

No, it means that he probably just offered Lannan to Florida for Hanley Ramirez and Volstad.

Posted by: 756* | July 31, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

"Jimbo - if you never look to trade pitching, why are toady's rumors centered on Lannan and Hanrahan?"

Have you seen our hitters lately?

Posted by: 756* | July 31, 2008 3:08 PM | Report abuse

I know I'm in the very small minority here...

But....

ADAM DUNN PLEASE!!!!


we'll give you back Kearns, Lopez and Wagner...

Posted by: Broncos7 | July 31, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

Lurker, good counter argument on trading Lannan. I just think it depends on what they would be able to get for him and what their other options are with starting pitching. You can actually make an argument (especially if you throw in Hill, J. Zimmermann and a free agent signee) that the Nats are well stocked at starter, even without Lannan, and some of those guys (Ballester, the free agent, even J. Zimmermann) could all be #1, 2, or 3 starters. It all depends on what they could get for him.

Posted by: baltova | July 31, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

You aren't in the minority, Adam Dunn is just the kind of bat this team needs. He gets on base at a high rate and is good for 40 HRs a season.

Posted by: Jason | July 31, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Jason Bay traded to the Rays.

Posted by: RH | July 31, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Not now that the steroids era is over. No on Dunn.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | July 31, 2008 3:16 PM | Report abuse

WSCR radio (670 AM) is going to update the "Nationals pitchers situation" after a commercial break they just went into.
I'll let everyone know what they say.

Posted by: Section 138 | July 31, 2008 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Just in....TRADES:

PLod: Traded to Milwaukee for 40 cases of bratwurst along with stale buns.

FLop: Traded to Baltimore for 20 cases of Natty Boh. Nationals initially claimed that the 20 cases were "skunky," but later realized that's Natty Boh's actual taste.

Ayala: Traded to Little League team in Piscataway, NJ.

Posted by: TimDz | July 31, 2008 3:17 PM | Report abuse

From MLBTR regarding Ayala

Omar Minaya "badly wants a reliever."

If you need a reliever real bad,

we have a real bad reliever!

Posted by: estuartj | July 31, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Dunn strikes out too much. I wouldn't like to pick him up.

Also, thanks to 138 for providing the gossip so Chico can spend his time on actual news.

Posted by: 3434 | July 31, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Details on Bay trade:

"MLB.com's Bill Chastain with the scoop - the Rays have acquired Jason Bay for Reid Brignac and Jeff Niemann. The Rays haven't confirmed it yet though. I wonder if Bay would DH for the Rays."

Posted by: Jason | July 31, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

You aren't in the minority, Adam Dunn is just the kind of bat this team needs. He gets on base at a high rate and is good for 40 HRs a season.
Posted by: Jason | July 31, 2008 3:14 PM

nooooooooooo. no more freakin reds. i dont care how good you think they are. keep em in ohio. they plain stink east of the mississippi.

Posted by: dk | July 31, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Striking out is overrated. Sure, you can't advance the runners, but how often do you advance the runners when you fly out these days? Not often enough to not trade for a guy that has an OBP consistently in the .380 range and has hit 40 HRs each of the last 3 seasons.

Posted by: Jason | July 31, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Dunn strikes out too much. I wouldn't like to pick him up.


And this would fit perfectly into our offense

Posted by: Broncos7 | July 31, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Haha, I'm tired of Reds as well, but if you're going to get one at least get a good one this time. Dunn, IMO, is a good one.

Posted by: Jason | July 31, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

"Striking out is overrated. Sure, you can't advance the runners, but how often do you advance the runners when you fly out these days? Not often enough to not trade for a guy that has an OBP consistently in the .380 range and has hit 40 HRs each of the last 3 seasons."
_______________________________________

Ryan Howard is batting something absurd (like .800) when he puts the ball in play.

Posted by: 756* | July 31, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

From Bill Ladson:

There are reports that the White Sox have interest in right-hander Joel Hanrahan. It's not known what the Nationals want in return. As of 3:00 p.m. ET, Hanrahan didn't hear anything about being traded to the White Sox.

There was an earlier report that the White Sox were close to acquiring Nationals left-hander John Lannan, but he is the ace of Washington's staff and they have nothing to replace him.

Posted by: Section 138 | July 31, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

231, you're right, I don't know how I screwed that up. He still sucks, though, and over the past eight games (I double-checked this time) he's hitting .156, which, I guess, means we're supposed to think that he's hurt again, but not going to tell anyone. Because, after all, he's a .261 lifetime hitter, not an overrated white guy.

Posted by: natty bo | July 31, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Striking out is overrated

Posted by: austin ks | July 31, 2008 3:26 PM | Report abuse

I'm sooo getting fired, btw. My productivity has been at 5% the last two hours.

Posted by: Section 138 | July 31, 2008 3:26 PM | Report abuse

I'm sooo getting fired, btw. My productivity has been at 5% the last two hours.

Posted by: Section 138 | July 31, 2008 3:26 PM

---------------------

Haha I feel exactly the same way. No worries, I'll stand with you in the unemployment line.

Posted by: 3434 | July 31, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

"over the past eight games (I double-checked this time) he's hitting .156"

sing it with me...

Posted by: SAMPLE SIZE | July 31, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

WSCR in Chicago just said the trades "are less than likely". "3 hours ago, [they] would've said it would've happened", but it's "pretty much dead."

Posted by: Section 138 | July 31, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

How many HR's would that be in a big boy ball park, as opposed to in Great American Smallpark?
-------------------------------------------------------------------
You aren't in the minority, Adam Dunn is just the kind of bat this team needs. He gets on base at a high rate and is good for 40 HRs a season.
Posted by: Jason | July 31, 2008 3:14 PM

Posted by: TimDz | July 31, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

From mlbtraderumors.com (evidently they couldn't keep our pitchers' names straight - great reporting, Tim ;-)):

By Tim Dierkes [July 31 at 2:29pm CST]

2:29pm: Correction: the Sox are interested in Nationals closer Joel Hanrahan, not Lannan.

1:00pm: WSCR Radio in Chicago reports that the White Sox are interested in 23 year-old Nationals lefty John Lannan. Jon Heyman has heard the same. He has a fine 3.33 ERA in 119 innings this year. Not much of a strikeout rate though.

Posted by: natsfan1a | July 31, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

The trade deadline has nearly past, with the Nats still cemented in last, and signs of going nowhere fast. So growth it seems will remain slow, as if we didn't already know, its gonna take patience to watch em grow. The candles aren't burning very bright, but the Nats will continue to fight, at least they'll show up every night. Mannys outlook has to be grim, as chances for wins are mighty slim....what did you expect from GM Jim.

Posted by: SC Nats Fan | July 31, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Both names were mentioned, with Lannan's being 30 minutes before Hanrahan. It wasn't Tim, it was the radio station changinf the names.
Regardless, it seems the talks are dead.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From mlbtraderumors.com (evidently they couldn't keep our pitchers' names straight - great reporting, Tim ;-)):
Posted by: natsfan1a | July 31, 2008 3:34 PM

Posted by: Section 138 | July 31, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for clarifying, 138. Perhaps the radio station confused the issue in their rush to get the word out.

On a somewhat related not, re. various comments about Chico not posting trade info, one of the things I always appreciated about Barry was that he seemed to take the time to verify facts with his sources rather than posting unsubstantiated rumors (rather old school in that way). Perhaps Chico is following in that tradition. If so, I applaud him for that.

Posted by: natsfan1a | July 31, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

We just refuted both the Lannan and Hanrahan rumors

Posted by: The Other Paper | July 31, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Shouldn't he let us know that what we're hearing are just unsubstantiated rumors?

Posted by: CharlottesvilleNat | July 31, 2008 3:48 PM | Report abuse

"How many HR's would that be in a big boy ball park, as opposed to in Great American Smallpark?"

There is very little if any differential between Dunn's home and away HR numbers (I'll look it up later, but we talked about this all off-season). When you have power like Dunn's it doesn't matter where you play, he'd have been fine at RFK.

The strike outs are a major issue for me, but we need some power out there and his defense wouldn't be worse than WMP's this year (now THAT is setting the bar low!) and he can play 1B too...

I'm not saying it's a good idea, but I've heard worse...

Posted by: Anonymous | July 31, 2008 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Shouldn't he let us know that what we're hearing are just unsubstantiated rumors?

Posted by: CharlottesvilleNat | July 31, 2008 3:48 PM

---------------------

By this reasoning, Chicken Little should run around all the time yelling, "The sky's NOT falling!" just in case any of us were wondering.

(Likely trades--especially with this team--are rare enough you can assume you'll hear it from sources you trust if it's really true.)

Posted by: The Big J | July 31, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

I know that's too small a sample size, but he's hit poorly more often this year than he's hit well.

Posted by: natty bo | July 31, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

From Rotoworld:

A high level Rays official denied that a deal for Jason Bay with the Pirates was done.

One lone MLB.com beat reporter is still the only one saying that a deal is done, while many others are saying talks are still ongoing. According to the previous report, Bay is on the way to Tampa Bay for Reid Brignac and Jeff Niemann.

Posted by: 756* | July 31, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Section 506 (BM): Thanks for putting a proper batter in my situation. I wasn't sure McCann was the right one and A. Jones is now with the Dodgers.

As for the White Sox looking at Hanrahan, I can understand that and would hope that we would get something good in return if the trade is made.

If the Mets want Ayala, we're more than happy to take Reyes off their hands. ;)

Posted by: LurkerNowPoster | July 31, 2008 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Mark Z at the Times has tonights line...........Orr at SS and NO LOPEZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I know I am a day or two late but for this I AM VERY THANKFUL!

CUT HIM NOW PLEASE! The single best thing that could happen in 6 mins is cutting Lopez, Perez, and Lo Duca.

Posted by: JayB | July 31, 2008 3:55 PM | Report abuse

new post

Posted by: estuartj | July 31, 2008 3:55 PM | Report abuse

I'm up!

Posted by: New post. | July 31, 2008 3:55 PM | Report abuse

In which Chico dispels Lannan rumors and provides lineups.

Posted by: new post | July 31, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

MLB.com's Jonathan Mayo says there is no done deal - the Rays might not make Brignac available.

Posted by: 231 | July 31, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

NATIONALS ACQUIRE SS ALBERTO GONZALEZ FROM YANKEES

IN EXCHANGE FOR MINOR-LEAGUE PITCHER JHONNY NUNEZ

Posted by: John Jr | July 31, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Section 114 - wow, thanks.

The first 5 OPS+ are all youngish, pre-arbitration guys, some already signed long term. Among the veteran who have reached free agency (some signed before reaching the market), a/k/a Guz's "peers," Young and Jeter are at 103 and 100, respectively, then comes Guz's 96, Tejada 95, and Renteria and Cabrera at 79 and 71, respectively. Probably the most relevant are the last two because they are (or are likely to be) then next best two SS on the FA market. You could probably add Uribe, Everett, and Eckstein to that list, too. Given the lack of internal options and no ability to trade for a Hanley, Reyes, Hardy, or Peralta, Guz probably was the best available if you jsut look at 2008.

Now look at the last contracts Cabrera and Renteria received. That looks like what a middling SS would make, and we signed Guz for less. Yes, if you believe he is a flash in the pan, then we bought high. He certainly has not had a career comparable to what Young / Jeter / Tejada had, or even Cabrera and Renteria. However, if you believe Guz's performance is sustainable, then this was a very good signing.
------------------------------------------
Using Baseball-reference's Play Index, I created a list of players with 350 or more ABs who've played 50% of their games at SS. Here's the list of 16 players sorted in descending order of OPS+ - Guzman is 9th out of sixteen, below Yunel Escobar and above Miggy Tejada.

http://www.bb-ref.com/pi/shareit/beVy

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | July 31, 2008 2:03 PM

Posted by: PTBNL | July 31, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

If it's two hours before the sky falling deadline I want the sky falling expert to keep me updated on the sky falling situation.

Posted by: CharlottesvilleNat | July 31, 2008 4:06 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company