Network News

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

Eckstein joins staff

One day sure produced plenty of thread to play with. Ryan Zimmerman hit his first home run yesterday since May 17. The Nats won their second consecutive one-run game against a team in (formerly in?) the playoff chase. They defeated a Hall of Fame pitcher. Their new closer held on once again.

But as far as I'm concerned, the most interesting thing to come out of yesterday's affairs -- and perhaps the most pertinent to the team's future composition -- was the announcement that Rick Eckstein will join the coaching staff come September 1.

Eckstein, after all, is a hitting coach.

Jim Bowden spoke about Eckstein yesterday as a future big-league coach. A permanent one.

And the Nats current batting coach, Lenny Harris, has had his job security scrutinized almost from the moment the season began.

Eckstein rejoined the organization after spending one year with the Class AAA affiliate in St. Louis. But this year, he was working with the Class AAA Columbus hitters -- and did his most noticeable work with Ryan Langerhans, helping him shorten his swing and giving him the foundation to finally be an adequate major league hitter.

Here is Eckstein's bio, from the Clippers' Web site.

Also note, this is not his first go-round as a hitting coach with a major league club. Last year he joined the Cardinals during September.

By Chico Harlan  |  August 28, 2008; 8:07 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Dodgers pregame (plus a Manny wig and vintage Maddux)
Next: Lineups from Nationals Park

Comments

This is an interesting development - I did not know that coaches got called up at the end of the season. Chico- call-ups are just around the corner - when will you know who we are going to see??

Posted by: masnstinks | August 28, 2008 8:18 AM | Report abuse

What's going on here? Where's the love for our team who just gave us two exciting victories? Where's the joy? I know this time of year forebodes winter, the loss of light, and seasonal affective disorder, but, are you kidding me? We Won! Has this Journal has been taken over by those who don't care about a win for the home team? Keep to yourselves your Cosmic Ennui, your depressive let's finish last, your NFL "the season is pointless unless we finish in the playoffs," your refusal to appreciate our guys playing their hearts out and winning! The Nats were magnificent last night! Hanrahan comes in with the bases loaded and saves the game! Zimmerman hits into the center field bleachers! EVERY GAME MATTERS!

Posted by: flynnie | August 28, 2008 8:19 AM | Report abuse

Thanks for the pep talk - it has been nice to see some hustle and small ball.Zim went yard, Boni is making contact, relievers are, well, relieving. I think a previous poster has a point, though -- there is an event going on in Denver that pretty much has attracted a lot of attention...

Posted by: masnstinks | August 28, 2008 8:25 AM | Report abuse

Carrying forward (let's post, uh, four?) -

Maybe the rain kept away the fair-weather fans last night, or perhaps it was fear and loathing as regards the possibility of seeing Jim Bowden in dreadlocks.

Posted by: natsfan1a | August 28, 2008 8:09 AM

Go Nats! Go Flynnie!

Posted by: natsfan1a | August 28, 2008 8:26 AM

Posted by: natsfan1a | August 28, 2008 8:28 AM | Report abuse

Chico posted some call-up ideas in his chat yesterday, masnstinks.

Welcome to Mr. Eckstein (he kinda looks like his brother).

Posted by: natsfan1a | August 28, 2008 8:30 AM | Report abuse

That's a good thing about Eckstein. Now all he needs to do is bring Dum Dum Davey Johnson with him so we can get an adult in the manager's slot.

Posted by: Brue | August 28, 2008 8:36 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, it was a very enjoyable evening. I'd have liked to have seen the Kent "bobble" that allowed Emilio to score all the way from second. Maddux denied catching Clemens in wins [he can get it next game].

Playing for draft picks is silly.

Posted by: cat daddy | August 28, 2008 8:45 AM | Report abuse

So do they formally announce Lenny Harris as deputy assistant associate for player development on September 1 or do they wait for the end of the season.

Is Eckstein up for a cup of coffee as the hitting coach with a chance to be a full time performer if he gets of to a good start?

If Eckstein is really responsible for Langerhans going from a guy you would pinch hit a pitcher for to a workable MLB hitter (4thOF/PH/PR/Defensive Replacement) then I can't wait to see him work...

Posted by: estuartj | August 28, 2008 8:48 AM | Report abuse

Hooray!!!

I don't doubt for a minute that Lenny Harris is a great guy, works hard or that he knows how to coach. I just don't think he can quite bring out the *best* in our hitters.

This is great. I don't need to see Lenny fired as long as SOMEBODY is there to bring out the best. I hope Eckstein is that guy.

I am SO happy about this.

Posted by: NatsNut | August 28, 2008 8:53 AM | Report abuse

If Eckstein is really responsible for Langerhans...

Posted by: estuartj |

Then I wish him a tumble down the clubhouse steps and he can coach on crutches...
Hey, just kidding...... but still...

Posted by: cat daddy | August 28, 2008 9:11 AM | Report abuse

It must be a good day - it's after 9 am and there have not been any announcements that someone went on the dl. Redding had a collision and Milledge got plunked - those things could easily mean a season -ending injury for us this year.

Posted by: masnstinks | August 28, 2008 9:18 AM | Report abuse

I realized last night how great it is to have a bunch of 23 year olds on the field - those guys are fast! so a lot of fun to watch, getting to and stealing bases that the 30 year olds can only reminisce about. How about that tag out of Milledge, with him running and junmping/waving at Flores to go to second - the whole thing looked like a comedy sketch. I didn't watch web gems last night, not that all of these plays would have qualified, but a tape of just these runs and slides would be quite entertaining. Yes, Flynnie, lots to love about the home team.

Posted by: Traveler | August 28, 2008 9:21 AM | Report abuse

The Milledge run-down, Zimmerman homer, and Belli rbi single were on the team site this a.m., but not the Boni run, which I would like to have seen (it sounded good on the radio :-D).

Posted by: natsfan1a | August 28, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

Can I pack Lenny's bags?

Posted by: John Jr | August 28, 2008 9:47 AM | Report abuse

So if Alvarez is sent back to college, then the Nats would have the 11th pick as compensation...

Arbiter to decide Alvarez's fate with Pirates
Union files grievance, contending contract agreement came too late

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08241/907633-63.stm

Posted by: 756* | August 28, 2008 9:56 AM | Report abuse

You can do both! I listened to the nats game on the radio last night, and watched Biden and Clinton's speech today.

Everybody should see Biden's speech:


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26431231#26431231

Posted by: multitasker | August 28, 2008 9:56 AM | Report abuse

Is the draft process broken?

Posted by: natsfan1a | August 28, 2008 10:13 AM | Report abuse

If you can't find another light-hitting middle infielder for the roster, might as well get a hitting coach who looks and sounds like one.

Posted by: Jubur | August 28, 2008 10:16 AM | Report abuse

Update on the Alvarez situation from MLBTR.com

MLB and the Pirates say the grievance is without merit, while Boras says the Bucs violated MLB's rules and need to "come clean." Dejan Kovacevic says the sides have not yet discussed the idea of more money, dismissing the idea that Boras demanded another $200K. An arbitrator will make a binding decision on this case on September 10th. Most believe Alvarez will remain a Pirate with a $6MM bonus.

By the way, Royals GM Dayton Moore is not concerned about Hosmer's contract.

Posted by: estuartj | August 28, 2008 10:21 AM | Report abuse

756*, I don't think that's right - I *think* the MLB ruling was that we get 9A, not counting any other compensation picks, so that it would go 1, 2, 2a, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9A, 9, 10... so that we get the pick after the ninth actual pick taken, regardless of other compensation picks.

As with almost any other thing you might be interested in in the Nats farm system, Brian over at NFA had a post about that around the time of the signing deadline, but I think that's the bottom line - we wouldn't be affected, just whoever gets the 9th overall would slide past us.

Posted by: Highway 295 Revisited | August 28, 2008 10:23 AM | Report abuse

NFA recently clarified that the Nats' 9a pick would in fact slide if other teams ahead of them also got compensation picks. So if the Bucs lose out, the Nats's pick slides to the 11th overall.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse

MLB has changed their minds on where compensatory picks fall so I don't think us picking 11th is set. Basically it depends on whether you define a pick as the order of selection or the slot you pick in. Logically I think that it makes sense to have us pick after the 9th slot in the draft no the 9th selection, but as a fan I hope they change their minds again.

None of this will probably matter since I doubt Alvarez will be back in the draft.

Would you rather pick 10th without Alvarez in the draft or 11th with him?

Posted by: MO Nats Fan | August 28, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Did anyone else think that Maddux drilled Milledge on purpose last night? Maddux usually has great control and then accidentally nails Milledge in the middle of his back. Looked suspicious to me.

Chico mentioned a handful of names in his chat yesterday, but Bernadina was the only one on the 40 man roster. Of the names mentioned, I don't know which ones would have to be moved onto the 40 man before the Rule 5 draft, so, they are possible call up candidates as well.

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | August 28, 2008 10:44 AM | Report abuse

MLB has gone back and forth and back again on where the pick falls.

Originally it was after the regularly slated pick. Then it was the pick after that number overall. Now it's back to the regularly slated pick

In (borderline) English, Jim Callis from Baseball America told me that the Nationals pick will come the pick after the #9 pick. Right now that is 10th overall. But if the Pirates/Alvarez thing were to end up not happening, the Pirates would get pick #2A (or #3) and the #9 pick would be the 10th overall and therefore the Nats compensation pick would be 11th.

Until MLB reverses course again ;)

There will be a quiz so take notes.

Posted by: Brian | August 28, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

NFA recently clarified that the Nats' 9a pick would in fact slide if other teams ahead of them also got compensation picks. So if the Bucs lose out, the Nats's pick slides to the 11th overall.
______________________________________

But of course, maybe not such a bad thing if we get a shot at Alvarez at next year's draft. I can't wait to see Bowden and Boras showdown with the Lerner's $$$ at stake!

Posted by: 756* | August 28, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

114, I wondered about that for a second. Maddux didn't throw another pitch like that the entire night, that far off the plate. But I can't imagine him deliberately hitting a fast leadoff batter in a one run game.

I did notice that it seemed to get Lastings fired up -- he was off on the first pitch to the next batter (which was fouled off), and then went first to third on the ensuing infield groundout. Maddux had the last laugh, though, when he picked him off third on the next play.

Posted by: joebleux | August 28, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

I don't think Maddox plunked Milledge on purpose, why would he? He was pitching him outside and then came back in and didn't control his pitch...it happens. The fact we didn't plunk anyone back shows the team didn't think it was deliberate.

It sure put some fire in Milledge though, the first to third was great baserunning and if Maddox wasn't such a wiley old bastard he would have scored from third on the groundout to the pitcher by Flores.

Posted by: estuartj | August 28, 2008 10:58 AM | Report abuse

The guys of note that I believe are Rule 5 eligible and are considerations for the 40-man in the off-season (or maybe September):

From prior to 2004: LHP Mike Hinckley, LHP Yunior Novoa and CA Luke Montz
From the 2004 draft: SS Ian Desmond, OF Marvin Lowrance and IF/OF Leonard Davis
From the 2005 draft: OF Mike Daniel and maybe RHP Craig Stammen

Posted by: Brian | August 28, 2008 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Maddux can't mow down hitters like he used to, but the Milledge pickoff tells you a lot about why he'll be a Hall-of-Famer.

Posted by: icefandc | August 28, 2008 11:27 AM | Report abuse

[quote]Boras says the Bucs violated MLB's rules and need to "come clean."[/quote]

correct me if i'm wrong, but if boras and his client committed to the contract after midnight without an extension, wouldn't that put *them* in violation of the rules as well? i mean, you can't have an agreement without both parties agreeing, can you? and if it was after midnight and boras/alvarez didn't "come clean" immediately, then weren't they lying, too?

not that we need any more proof that boras is a lying sack of excrement, but the "business" of baseball will be better when he's no longer a part of it. addition by subtraction, don't let the door hit you in the tailfeathers on the way out...

Posted by: 231 | August 28, 2008 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Dave Sheinin: I see a handful of questions here from despondent Nats fans regarding this awful season. And it would take a book to give the answer you're looking for here. But let me just try to provide a little perspective, colored by own opinion.

My own sense of the situation is that most of what troubles the Nationals can be traced back to ownership's unwillingness to spend money. This a franchise, remember, that had a very good season, relative to expectations, a year ago, and that built upon that success by -- what? By making Paul Lo Duca their cornerstone free agent acquisition? By shedding payroll to pick up Lastings Milledge in a trade? You can quibble with many of Jim Bowden's moves, but what has he been given to work with?

And I'll take exception with one point you make here -- I wouldn't characterize attendance as "tepid." For a team as bad as this one, 29,000-plus per game is pretty good. Now, on the other hand, the TV and radio ratings are abysmal, and folks around the game are justified in questioning the viability of this market.

Personally, I still believe in DC as a baseball market, and if the Nationals' owners would just show fans something, this thing could bounce back in relatively little time.

Posted by: Shenin = LAC? | August 28, 2008 11:31 AM | Report abuse

If MASN is going to have these "wireless Wednesday's", which can be very entertaining with the right player, can they please tell the announcers to stop talking over top of the player?

Posted by: J | August 28, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

wait... do people really view the milledge trade as a "shedding payroll" move?

Posted by: 231 | August 28, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Yo, cat daddy & others . . . .

Boni was FLYING(!) around the bases last night during that play. That dude is F-A-S-T. It was also just a heads-up hustle play (as was Milledge's first-to-third on the Zimmerman (Flores?) single).

Boni also hit a slow grounder (not a dribbler) that an on-the-grass third baseman fielded about 3-4 steps from the mound, and the throw beat him by no more than a half-step. I mean he is noticeably faster than Willie (Hello, wall!) Harris.

Dude could bunt EVERY time and have a reasonable shot of beating out every throw.

Posted by: Choowee | August 28, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

I'll be interested to see whether Milledge plays today after the act he put on after being plunked.

I would also hate to see the welt on Redding's leg after being whacked by Manny's hit.

Also, Willie Harris got up pretty slowly after he hit the wall running after that foul ball (which he missed). Dude, if you're going to injure yourself on the wall, make the catch (and SportsCenter).

Posted by: Choowee | August 28, 2008 11:45 AM | Report abuse

icefandc,

That Maddux dupe of Milledge last night was nice. And gutsy. I don't think he could have made the play at first if the fake didn't work.

Posted by: Choowee | August 28, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

"wait... do people really view the milledge trade as a "shedding payroll" move?

Posted by: 231 | August 28, 2008 11:38 AM "

Only bozos like me and LAC.

Posted by: obviously China-brainwashed Sheinin | August 28, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

On the Fence: In PTI style: Who would you rather have owning your favorite baseball team in the long-term? Angelos or Lerners?

Dave Sheinin: That's a tough call. No, wait -- actually, it isn't. I'll take Angelos. He may not always spend wisely (see: Belle, Albert), but at least he spends.

Posted by: The Truth Hurts | August 28, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Wow, Sheinin really was brainwashed in Beijing. He's speaking nonsense.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | August 28, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Whatever you do, Chico, don't advise him to play a game of solitaire.

Posted by: natsfan1a | August 28, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

natsfan1a, are you suggesting Sheinin's mom is a megalomaniacal schemer who has an unhealthy affection for him?

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | August 28, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

This is the most encouraging quote of the day, from Dukes via mlb.com;

"I heal a little quicker, but, at the same time, this is an injury that needs more pain tolerance," Dukes said. "I'm able to endure a lot of pain. I started to work as soon as they gave me the go-ahead to start running and working out. I worked hard, and I was able to come back pretty fast."

Posted by: estuartj | August 28, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

heh heh, 506, you got it...

Posted by: natsfan1a | August 28, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

Hope this link works. Look for the Kent bobble at about 1:45.

http://washington.nationals.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?mid=200808283380500&c_id=was

Posted by: natsfan1a | August 28, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

Thanks Choowee regarding Emilio's speed. When I read that, I couldn't imagine how a mere bobble, even from Kent, would give anyone enough time to score.
And batting him 8th, so they might pitch around him to get to the pitcher's spot, is something I've been begging my computer screen for quite some time.

Posted by: cat daddy | August 28, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

cat daddy,

Just to give you some perspective . . .

Kent had to take a few steps to his right to field the ball, which basically hit the heel of his glove. The ball bounced away from Kent no further than one step. Boni (here's the heads-up part) was booking the entire time. Kent changed directions, took one step, picked up the ball, and threw to first--all fairly quickly. Still, the play at the plate was not really close.

Posted by: Choowee | August 28, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Thanks natsfan1a, but my computer, she is old and no good at playing the videos [except for the little ones on the gamer page]. I did see Milledge's rundown and Zim's homer. Maybe they'll add the highlight reel later.

Posted by: cat daddy | August 28, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

You're welcome, cat daddy. Didn't mean to freeze up your computer.

Posted by: natsfan1a | August 28, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

I also think Bonifacio was running on the pitch, which put him at or near third base by the time Kent tried to field the ball. I hope the weather clears up so tonight's game gets played. Kershaw struggled in his last start in Philly, but he has dynamic stuff and a matchup between he and Lannan will be fun to watch.

Posted by: TJH | August 28, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

The Ekstein move is interesting and will satisfy the "Fire Lenny Harris" crowd if he takes over. However the key will be his ability to communicate with 23 year olds. Milledge is showing improvement - heard an interview with him and he says his Dad taught him to hit and he never really got much formal instruction. Maybe he decided to listen to Harris now, he sems to come to the plate with a plan. The other key for young players is being able to adjust to the quality and adaptability of ML pitching. They will find your weaknesses and keep feeding you stuff you can't hit until you either adjust or wash out. Teaching is necessary but experience (usually painfull) is the only way to learn and grow.

Posted by: NatMan | August 28, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the description, Choowee. Following the team from 1500 miles away is a little difficult, living in a cardboard box in the middle of the road, down by the river and all...
And no one supports video for Win 98SEtch-a-Sketch anymore hardly...

Posted by: cat daddy | August 28, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

You might be right, TJH. I did not recall him running on the play, but he might have. Milledge was definitely running on his 1st-to-3rd.

Posted by: Choowee | August 28, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

You're welcome, cat daddy. Actual replay might be different from my memory, you know.

Posted by: Choowee | August 28, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Choowee, this is not a situation that allows replay, sorry.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | August 28, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

WASHINGTON -- Nationals infield prospect Esmailyn Gonzalez clinched the Gulf Coast League batting title on Wednesday. Gonzalez, 18, went 2-for-2 with a double and two RBIs against the GCL Marlins to complete his second domestic season with a .350 batting average.

In addition to winning the batting title, Gonzalez finished the regular season with two home runs, 33 RBIs, nine stolen bases and an on-base percentage of .436 in 50 games.

"Obviously, we are very pleased with his performance," general manager Jim Bowden said. "He was able to be healthy this year. He came in shape and worked really hard. He has come a long way in a short period of time."

For now, the team feels Gonzalez can skip Class A Vermont and go to Class A Hagerstown to start the 2009 season.

Posted by: Media Guide Momma | August 28, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

I wish the video of the Milledge rundown showed where Flores was. It looks to me like with Milledge running so close to home that Flores would have made it to third, which would have basically made it the same as if Milledge had stayed put and Maddox had thrown out Flores at first.

Posted by: estuartj | August 28, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

While it was many things (and I do believe that Jimbo was primarily going after a player that he wanted), the Milledge trade was indeed a salary dump. The Nats shedded themselves of $9.8M owed on Schneider's contract and avoided arbitration with Church (who was coming off of a decent year, and signed with the Mets for $1.75M). Milledge, on the other hand, is making $.380M. While it certainly wasn't the main reason for the move, don't think for a minute that the money didn't factor into the transaction.

Posted by: not LAC (but still counting dollars) | August 28, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Church himself suggested that the Nats made the trade to save money.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Happene to see this in Dave Sheinin's chat:

On the Fence: In PTI style: Who would you rather have owning your favorite baseball team in the long-term? Angelos or Lerners?

Dave Sheinin: That's a tough call. No, wait -- actually, it isn't. I'll take Angelos. He may not always spend wisely (see: Belle, Albert), but at least he spends.


HAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA.

Good times.

Have you all thrown a huge party/parade for the Nats yet? Since they've won a whopping 2 games in a row?

Posted by: O's Exec | August 28, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

"Church himself suggested that the Nats made the trade to save money.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 1:02 PM "

Church is cheap.

Posted by: so is talk | August 28, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

"Church himself suggested that the Nats made the trade to save money.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 1:02 PM "
__________________________

Was he concussed at the time?

Posted by: 756* | August 28, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Replay? Er, video? Er, video replay?

Posted by: Choowee | August 28, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

Sheinin has managed to completely destroy any credibility that he may have had. It's truly frightening that WaPo continues to pay him. To wit:

1. He complains that the Lerners' are a less desirable set of owners than Angelos. He does not provide any sort of basis for his reasoning. Doesn't say how he would have spent the money, etc.

2. Now I'm about the last person to defend the little toad, but to say that spending on Belle was, somehow, a mistake on the part of Angelos is utter nonsense. There was no way to know that A.B. had a degenerative problem. Apparently, even the company that insured his salary didn't know. In fact, that injury caused the insurance companies that provide that coverage to rethink the length of time that they would insure such contracts.

3. The whole tone of his answer to the instant replay situation is absolute confirmation that he doesn't bother to think these things through.

In retrospect:

1. Lennie Harris needs to be put out to pasture.
2. Bowden probably needs to go (especially if Steinbrenner, fils fires Chashman)
3. Sheinin needs to take a buy out. Now! Let's have the WaPo stop wasting electrons (to say nothing of ink) on him.

Posted by: Catcher50 | August 28, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

I think 506 was riffing on the ump/reply controversy, Choowee.

Posted by: natsfan1a | August 28, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

I initially thought that too, RE: Sheinin's salary dump comment, but if you go back and read it, Sheinin is clearly saying that the Milledge deal was IN ORDER TO dump salary. There's no doubt it's a by-product, but that's not how he wrote it.

Here it is:

"...This a franchise, remember, that had a very good season, relative to expectations, a year ago, and that built upon that success by -- what? By making Paul Lo Duca their cornerstone free agent acquisition? By shedding payroll to pick up Lastings Milledge in a trade? ..."

Maybe he just missed his copy editor, but the structure of that paragraph says they built upon that success by shedding payroll. Then add the "to pick up Lastings Milledge in a trade" and it's one giant mess of intent. But it's closest to saying that Milledge was a payroll dumping move -- which is idiotic.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | August 28, 2008 1:14 PM | Report abuse

noooo - and once again I experience that very special NJ moment when you realize that you have submitted a typo (just after you hit "submit").

"replay"

Posted by: natsfan1a | August 28, 2008 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Gee, thanks for bringing us back to earth O's Exec. The euphoria was getting out of control. Yeah, your last place team is better than our last place team but the bottom line is that the Nat's are OUR last place team. Too bad you need to look for someone on a lower rung to make yourself feel superior. Tearing down others = insecurity. Just try to relax enjoy YOUR team, no matter where they finish. Guess you are following the Stephen Hunter model and found someone to hate.

Posted by: NatMan | August 28, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Don't worry Natman, YOUR Nats still have a chance to finish the season 40 some odd games under .500.

That's something the O's have never done.

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

Posted by: O's Exec | August 28, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

NatMan, he's a resident troll. We ignore him.

Posted by: NatsNut | August 28, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse

...crickets...

...scroll...

Posted by: the proper response | August 28, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Am I not getting something? A .500 season means you win half the games. 162 / 2 = 81. 81 - 40 (number of games under .500) = 41.

Current Washington record, 48-85

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | August 28, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

We had the worst record to start a season ever...

Posted by: Baltimore Orioles | August 28, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

1988
Orioles were 54-107.
That's 53 games under .500.

PWNED.

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | August 28, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

"Current Washington record, 48-85

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | August 28, 2008 1:30 PM "

Which is 37 games under .500.

Posted by: didn't someone already explain this to you last year? | August 28, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

In 2001 the O's were 63-98.

That's not 40 games under, but 35 is close enough. We are talking about 2 last place teams, right.

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | August 28, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

1953 O's were 54-100

Posted by: more math fun | August 28, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

1988
Orioles were 54-107.
That's 53 games under .500.

PWNED.

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | August 28, 2008 1:33 PM

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

Too bad I was talking about the current 10+ season losing streak.

PWNED!!!!!

And, atleast the O's didn't have to come from Montreal to a city that has already had 2 other MLB teams in the last 40 years.

Yikes!

Atleast the O's don't need playstations to distract the kiddies from the awful play on the field.

Atleast in the first year of Camden Yards the O's were able to sell out all their home games.

Posted by: O's Exec | August 28, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Hate on, O's Exec. Your rants say more about you than our beloved Nats. Our love is blind and so is your rage. As with all haters you may have the last apoplectic word.

Posted by: NatMan | August 28, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

"The Nats won their second consecutive one-run game against a team in (formerly in?) the playoff chase."

As a longtime Giants fan, I'm the last one to object when someone disses L.A., but they're only three games out, chasing a team that's won 30 of their last 81, and it's only August 28. I just don't get it. It's not like they're chasing LA@A.

Posted by: CE | August 28, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse

So, now it's a 10 season window - I thought you said "never" - but then again, 1988 might as well be never for you - as I'm sure you weren't even born yet.

From Orioles.mlb.com, The Kids' Zone, located near Gate C, features entertainment for younger fans, including a moon bounce, speed pitch, climb and play area, a coloring station, and more!

Have you even been to Camden Yards.

Now, go PWN yourself.

------------------------
Don't worry Natman, YOUR Nats still have a chance to finish the season 40 some odd games under .500.

That's something the O's have never done.

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

Posted by: O's Exec | August 28, 2008 1:26 PM

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | August 28, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse

I PWNED your mom. It was good.

Posted by: O's exec | August 28, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Just admit it guys. The O's are currently a better organization than your beloved Nats. They've got more upside than the Montreal Expos, I mean Nats.

Posted by: O's Exec | August 28, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

So it seems that the Nationals, as well as the Pirates and the Royals, may have received authorization from Selig to continue negotiating beyond the midnight deadline for signing draftees. See this article from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08241/907633-63.stm

One possible outcome of the Pirates/Boras/Alvarez arbitration scheduled for September 10 is that the parties will be given an additional window of time to negotiate and possibly reach an agreement (this is apparently what Boras is angling for).

If that happens, query whether it might reopen the door for the Nats and Crow?

Posted by: Bob L. Head | August 28, 2008 2:01 PM | Report abuse

I would think not, Bob L., given that Crow had stated that he intended to file paperwork to ensure that the Nats could not draft him next year.

Posted by: natsfan1a | August 28, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

A chance for a Crow do-over! That could work out for the Nats like the Juwan Howard do-over worked out for the Bullets.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse

The more I hear about Crow, the less I like him.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | August 28, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse

More for the "O's Exec" - The Orioles moved to Baltimore from St. Louis where they were the Browns. The Yankees used to play in Baltimore where they were know as the Baltimore Orioles.

And nice. My mom's dead, so, hope you enjoyed hitting that.

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | August 28, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

I would think not, Bob L., given that Crow had stated that he intended to file paperwork to ensure that the Nats could not draft him next year.

Posted by: natsfan1a | August 28, 2008 2:03 PM

----

Leave it to the Nats to blow their chance to sign a very good player.

Bwhahahahhahahah

Posted by: O's Exec | August 28, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, I know it's a longshot for relationship reasons and many others, I was just thinking that if the arbitrator ends up saying that there was no deal before the midnight deadline but that, nevertheless, the two sides can continue to negotiate, then it's at least theoretically possible to argue that other teams should be entitled to the same additional opportunity. I don't think that's going to happen, but what if it did, and the Nats put $4m on the table? A lot of the fallout from the failed negotiations coulc be chalked up to blustering, as in, "yeah, I left $3.5m on the table because I didn't want to be there anyway."

Posted by: Bob L. Head | August 28, 2008 2:12 PM | Report abuse

There is no paperwork for Crow to submit so the Nats can't re-draft him. IF we wanted to re-draft him THEN we would have to request his permission to draft him.

Crow may feel very differently come June...his stock may be much lower and one advantage he will have in negotiations next time with the Nats that he won't have with anyone else is that we MUST sign our supplimental draft choice or we lose that pick permanently. It gives him more leverage then if he was picked by someone else who can dare him to go back to Ft. Worth for a 2nd year...

Posted by: estuartj | August 28, 2008 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Nots not going to re-open that window with Crow - he doesn't want it. If you listen that blogger radio interview. Crow's moved on and might not have really wanted to sign here. So, good riddance.

As for Boras and Alvarez, I'd be surprised if MLB reopens that window. It creates too much trouble for future negotiations.

As for the draft being broken... not exactly, but it's darned close.

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | August 28, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

i disagree that the milledge deal was a "salary dump." if you happen to save money in a deal, that doesn't make it a "dump." by definition, a salary dump is getting rid of a player to save money (primary reason, not 'oh, and we save some $$, too'). and generally, in salary dumps, you don't get quality players in return.

if you believe you're getting the best player in the deal (which the nats FO obviously did), saving money is a bonus, not a primary benefit.

Posted by: 231 | August 28, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

catcher 50, i think you have to look at the entire situation with belle to understand why his signing was a mistake. here's what happened (to the best of my recollection).

palmiero stated during his final season (first time around) that he wanted to sign an extension with the Os and the numbers tossed around were fairly reasonable. angelos decided he'd wait until the offseason to let the market set the price. unfortunately for him, the market (i.e., texas) set the bar much higher and palmiero, insulted, i don't think even bothered to give the Os a second shot and just signed there. panicking because they didn't have a solid power hitter, they paid even more to sign belle, who was of questionable character to begin with. all of that could have been avoided if he'd agreed to sign palmiero at what was a significantly below-market rate in the end. thus it was a very expensive mistake, even if belle had stayed healthy.

this is not dissimilar to what happened with mussina, who wanted to sign an extension and stay in baltimore at one point. except they didn't make the "belle" mistake with someone along the lines of SF's "zito" mistake. maybe he learned from the palmiero/belle situation (can't remember exactly how close the timing was for those).

Posted by: 231 | August 28, 2008 2:16 PM | Report abuse

estuartj - you make a good point. It would be interesting from a fan's perspective to see the Nats request an additional window based on the Pirates/Boras/Alvarez precedent. Then the Nats offer $4M - 1 time, take it or leave it. I think it would repair some of the damage if Crow declines the offer.

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | August 28, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

More for "Sec 114, Row E" - The original Washington Senators left D.C., bound for Minnesota in 1960. The next year, 1961, the Washington Senators 2.0 began play in D.C. before leaving the District 10 years later in 1971 this time bound for Texas. The current D.C. team moved from Montreal.

Yikes!

Posted by: O's Exec | August 28, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

I think the rules from the CBA say that you must inform MLB and the PA that you have a deal, you can then work out "minor" details for a formal, signed contract afterwords.

This is from MLB.com

"Here's how the process seems to work in these down-to-the-wire cases. The two sides come to a verbal agreement on a net value for the deal. Using the Alvarez case as the example, that value was $6 million. By 11:59 p.m., both sides notify the Commissioner's Office a deal has been struck for that amount. After midnight, it's fairly common for some of the smaller details to be ironed out -- things like when/where the physical will take place, smaller benefits like college tuition (if it's applicable), etc."

Posted by: MO Nats Fan | August 28, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Who taught you people math? You don't get the number of games below .500 by subtracting wins from losses. That's twice as large a number as you're looking for. For example, 54-107 is 26.5 games below .500, not 53.

Posted by: Scott in Shaw | August 28, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

'Bout bloody-blue bleeping TIME they brought in a new pitching coach. Shoulda done it three months ago. Hopefully Lenny can find a more suitable position within the organization.

Posted by: Juan-John | August 28, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Throwing something else out there of baseball interest so we can avoid talking about the O's, the Senators and necrophilia -- the GCL Nats lead the GCL Twins 7-2 going into the bottom of the 7th (Nats batting). Our team includes six 2008 draft picks, LF Destin Hood (2nd round), RF John Higley (9th), DH Jonathan Ramirez (15th), 2b Steve Lombardozzi (19th), CF Chris Curran (22nd) and 3b Ronnie Labrie (38th).

Catch the action (well, the box score) here:

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?sid=milb&t=g_box&gid=2008_08_28_twirok_natrok_1

Posted by: Bob L. Head | August 28, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Who taught you people math? You don't get the number of games below .500 by subtracting wins from losses. That's twice as large a number as you're looking for. For example, 54-107 is 26.5 games below .500, not 53.

Posted by: Scott in Shaw | August 28, 2008 2:23 PM
--------

Well no one ever accused Nats fans of being math-wizzes.

Posted by: O's Exec | August 28, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Wait. What? No way. DC had 2 teams move away? And we got our team from Montreal? The Hell you say!

O's Exec, you really are an idiot.

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | August 28, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

O's Exec, you really are an idiot.

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | August 28, 2008 2:36 PM

-----

Well being an idiot is better than having a dea,

Oh nevermind.

Posted by: O's Exec | August 28, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

estuartj, my paperwork remark was based on the quote below from a Topeka Capital-Journal piece (full story via link below):

"When it comes time for the 2009 draft, Crow obviously must hope for the best, not only in terms of his positioning, but also the organization that selects him. Crow will sign a form prohibiting the Nationals from being part of that mix."

http://blogs.cjonline.com/index.php?entry=7791

Posted by: natsfan1a | August 28, 2008 2:44 PM | Report abuse

Twinkies score 3 in the top half of the 8th to make it 7-5, but the Nats come back with a run in the bottom half. I think they're still batting, with Smiley on second and Curran on third after a double by Gonzalez.

Posted by: Bob L. Head | August 28, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

And Destin Hood doubles in two more runs. 10-5 Nats!

This is why it's better to sign and get into uniform. Crow could have been pitching this game and playing with his future teammates. Instead he's $3.5 million poorer and playing (or not playing, it seems) with a bunch of losers in Fort Worth.

Posted by: Bob L. Head | August 28, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

"54-107 is 26.5 games below .500, not 53"

No, it's 53 games below .500. A .500 record for a team with 107 losses would be 107-107. The 54-win team is 53 games short of a .500 record, or as is usually said it is 53 games under .500.

This may not make sense to you from a mathematical perspective, but trust me it is standard baseball (or sports in general) usage from time immemorial.

Posted by: there's no math in baseball! | August 28, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Is that really true?

I refuse to use that method of telling how far a team is under .500, because it's idiotic.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | August 28, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

The 54-win team is 53 games short of a .500 record, or as is usually said it is 53 games under .500.

Posted by: there's no math in baseball! | August 28, 2008 3:05 PM
---------------

Actually since MLB teams play 162 games, .500 is 81-81. So, let's do some math:

81 - 54 = 27 games under .500

Again, no one ever said Nats fans were math-wizzes.

Posted by: O's Exec | August 28, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

"the GCL Nats lead the GCL Twins 7-2 going into the bottom of the 7th (Nats batting). "

Did the GCL Twins used to be the GCL Senators?

Posted by: are we just playing with ourselves here? (so what else is new?) | August 28, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

"I refuse to use that method of telling how far a team is under .500, because it's idiotic.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | August 28, 2008 3:10 PM"

Then prepare to be laughed at the first time you boldly exclaim to a fan of some other team that YOUR team is only two and a half games under .500.

Posted by: unlees it's a phillies fan, in which case prepare to be beaten up | August 28, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

No, no, really. In a sport that calculates something called the "value over replacement player" based on a formula so complex, no one ever describes what it is, to calculate the number of games under 50% in a way that allows the total number of games to be drastically more than the number actually played is staggeringly stupid.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | August 28, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Also, look at it this way. If you say that a 54-107 team is 53 games under .500, what that means is that the team would need to win 53 straight games to reach a .500 record. This tells you something of value. Saying that a team needs to win 26.5 games and un-lose 26.5 previous games to reach .500 tells you absolutely nothing. So which way is idiotic after all?

Posted by: once you grasp this, then we can move on to the concept of | August 28, 2008 3:20 PM | Report abuse

It's over -- GCL Nats advance, 10-5 over the GCL Twins. Next up, the three-game GCL championship series, where we face ... the GCL Phillies!

Posted by: Bob L. Head | August 28, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Math in Baseball. I guess you are "technically" right - a 17-23 team is only 3 games under .500 - but everyone (for a long time) has been saying that the 17-23 team is 6 games under .500. Implying that an 6 game win streak would get that team back to .500.

Either way, 54-107 or 48-85 is bad news for your baseball team.

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | August 28, 2008 3:27 PM | Report abuse

Either way, 54-107 or 48-85 is bad news for your baseball team.

Posted by: Sec 114, Row E | August 28, 2008 3:27 PM

-----

Now that's something we ALL can agree on.

Speaking of which, what's more recent?

54-107 or 48-85?

Posted by: O's Exec | August 28, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

My Turn!

Posted by: New Post | August 28, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

I think the difference is whether you're talking about games below .500 during the season or after the season. During, as long as you have more games left than the difference between your wins and losses, it would make sense to use the measurement of [guy who keeps changing his name to some arrogant quip]. If a team is 30 and 50, it is 20 games below .500 because it could win 20 in a row to reach .500. However, at the end of a season, you're really asking how many more games a team would have had to have won to finish with a .500 record. Therefore, a team that finishes 61-101 is not, in fact, 40 games below, because there aren't 40 more games to play (and win in a row). That team finished 20 games below .500, because had it won 20 more (and lost 20 less) it would have finished at 81-81.

Posted by: Scott in Shaw | August 28, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

"Math in Baseball. I guess you are "technically" right - a 17-23 team is only 3 games under .500 - but everyone (for a long time) has been saying that the 17-23 team is 6 games under .500. Implying that an 6 game win streak would get that team back to .500."

This makes sense. Because you CAN have a six game winning streak. But at the end of the season, why calculate it based on possible extended season games and not based on the team's overall record for the year?

In that case you're not talking about the team's future possible standing, you're talking about the team's actual former standing.

Every win within a set number of games really would mean one less loss.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | August 28, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

You said it better, Scott! Right on.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | August 28, 2008 3:38 PM | Report abuse

I think 506 was riffing on the ump/reply controversy, Choowee.

Posted by: natsfan1a | August 28, 2008 1:13 PM
--------------

Yes, indeed. I held a moment of silence last night during the game in memory of the impending demise of the "human element" of baseball.

Posted by: Choowee | August 28, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

Just a reminder to do as I do and ignore him.

Posted by: O's Exec's Mom | August 28, 2008 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Just a reminder to do as I do and ignore him.

Posted by: O's Exec's Mom | August 28, 2008 4:05 PM
--------------
And by "ignore" - you mean "neglect" right?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 28, 2008 5:19 PM | Report abuse

Just a reminder to do as I do and ignore him.
Posted by: O's Exec's Mom | August 28, 2008 4:05 PM


Exactly, OEM: Never argue with an idiot...they drag you down to their level, and then they win with their experience.

Posted by: Jim B | August 28, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company