Network News

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

Angels Make Eight-Year Offer to Teixeira

According to this L.A. Times story (which credits the team-owned flagship radio station), the Angels have made an eight-year offer to free agent first baseman Mark Teixeira.

The dollar amount was unspecified, but Bill Shaikin, the fine reporter who wrote the story, says the team was believed to have offered at least $160 million.

This, obviously, changes the landscape of the Teixeira sweepstakes, as the Nationals' best chance for landing him was to blow everyone else out of the water with their offer -- which, apparently, has not happened. That's not to say the Nationals can't sweeten their offer, but team officials have indicated an unwillingness to get into a bidding war with higher-revenue teams.

Of course, we still have yet to hear from the Red Sox -- or even the Yankees, as I hypothesized in today's print edition. In any case, it appears this thing is far from over.

By Dave Sheinin  |  December 13, 2008; 9:29 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Nationals Actively Seeking Bullpen Help
Next: As We Begin Another Week on the Teixeira Watch

Comments

Uh oh...

Time to step up Lerners! Gotta stay on top here.

Posted by: AlexL925 | December 13, 2008 10:04 AM | Report abuse

No need to get into a bidding war. The Lerners need to make one more offer.

10 yrs, 210mm, opt out after year 3 and no trade.

Let the Angels, Bosox and Yankees mull that one. This would be the last bid by the Lerners.

This the one chance to change the Nats franchise. Tex is not going to change Boston, Yankees or Angels franchise. Tex is more important to us. For that reason the Lerners should increase their bid.

It was obvious that 8 yrs ,$160mm was not going to blow away the competition, especially with a pitcher signing for $161mm.

This is the Lerners chance.To cover his salary the Nats would have to sell an additional 4,320 tickets at an average price of $30. I have to think Tex would draw that especially if they become competitive. The Caps have spent big money, now it is the Lerners turn.

An Expos' fan in NYC.

Posted by: mjames0 | December 13, 2008 10:13 AM | Report abuse

I don't see that happening. I view the Lerner offer as a planned failure. 8 years 160 was never going to do it and they know it. "Unwillingness to get into a bidding war".....for Tex? Just tells us they never intended to win. Things seem to be going just as they planned. They now have the excess they needed for not getting anything done in December when good players are signed for big money....now their true plan can be executed......find the next D Young and Perez for MLB min salary and hope to improve on 102 lose season......it must be nice to be able to fool so many people so easily.

Dave if you are still working this weekend…….are you buy the Lerner PR move? Is this Tex delay giving Nats the cover they wanted to rationalize why they had DONE NOTHING!

Posted by: JayBeee | December 13, 2008 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Notice where the six main free agents have ended up or are reputed to end up: Rodriquez-Mets, Sabathia-Yankees, Burnett-Yankees, Ibanez-Phillies, Teixiera(likely Boston or Anaheim, but I'm still hoping), Lowe-linked mainly to the Red Sox or Yankees.
And the rich get richer. This is good for baseball, how? Jeeves

Posted by: jcampbell1 | December 13, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

JayBeee,

I could not agree with you more. The only question will be who says "we tried" first: Cheap Learners, Jim "Reds" Bowden, or Kanstansia?

You got to love DC sports teams. Find a way to fail.

C-A-P-S Caps! Caps! Caps! Win and people will come.

Posted by: Batboy05 | December 13, 2008 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Judging by the Nationals' first offer, it doesn't seem that their goal was to blow the competition away. Doesn't mean they couldn't have the highest final offer, which is what matters, yes?

By the way, I've been casually looking at comparisons between Teixeira and that other guy we're talking about, Adam Dunn. Seriously, in offensive production, they're not far apart at all. I'm prepared to believe that Teixeira is a significantly better choice than Dunn, but I'm hoping someone else can help me quantify it. I've come up with the following: Teixeira hits for a higher average (hits are better than walks), strikes out less often (more productive outs), plays better defense, and is more attractive.

I mean, Teixeira is certainly a better ballplayer overall, and I understand the argument that he could occupy a Ripkenesque place in the Nats' pantheon. But if we're talking about $21 million per year versus $13 million*, is the Tex surcharge worth it? Help me out here.

* I have no talent for guessing players' salaries, as I have paid little attention to such matters over the years. I'm learning a lot from reading y'all's comments, but I remain woefully inexperienced. (Also, I really hope that the Nats are talking to Dunn; I know I'd want to know how much my Plan B will cost when deciding whether to give up on Plan A.)

Sorry for the long post. It kept on growing.

Posted by: Scooter_ | December 13, 2008 10:44 AM | Report abuse

I say we as fans should let this play out before we start throwing in the towel or throwing out accusations.

The Nats were a long shot to get Tex, I think we all knew that going in. I think we all knew deep down that 8 years 160 million was not going to get it done either. They may sweetin' the deal or maybe they go after Dunn and Hudson instead. I'm just glad they seem to willing to spend some cash.

Posted by: Section505203 | December 13, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

"willing to spend some cash".....where is the evedence of that? Cutting Redding lose? Cutting Perez lose? Not signed Zim yet? Can someone show me where they are seeing evedence of Lerner spending some cash.....Olson, Willingham and Harris.....that is going to come in under Lo Duca and Estrada's $6 Million......come one people.....nothing has changed.

They need CF, 2B, 1B and 2 starting pitchers and 3 Releif pitchers...so far they have a Single A rule 5 pick with a bad attitued from the Reds no less.........this is Change?

Posted by: JayBeee | December 13, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

On the Dunn v. Teixeira comparison:
1) Teixiera's OBP over the last few years has been increasing; just over .400. That's a lot of time on base. By comparison, Dunn's is about .380 over the last few years.
2) Similar with SLG - a little better and improving.
3) Teixiera's defensive stats are superb - he's a very good 1b. Dunn's a not-so-good RF. Dunn's played some 1b and he's about average at the job.

They're about the same age, but the numbers appear that Tex is just entering his prime (even though most hitters peak at 27)

Now, I'm a big fan of the nats, and I'm no Bowden-hater like everyone else is, but I think the Lerners really do need to be serious about this.

Posted by: Section406 | December 13, 2008 11:11 AM | Report abuse

I see where the Angels' are claiming that their offer was on the table in Vegas (mlb.com). The initial rumoured price on that was 7-150M, not the 8-160 now being discussed. Have the Angels' now made a matching counter? Will John Henry (who is losing BIG money on his NASCAR investment) give Theo the ok to make an offer for Teixeira? Will the spawn of Steinbrenner spend the GNP on northern Africa over the next ten years? Stay tuned, there's all this & more, on the next episode of "Boros' Big Top".

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 11:11 AM | Report abuse

At this point I'm just hoping the Nats don't cheap out and actually draft and sign Strasburg and their other 1st round draft pick... If they go the way of the Pirates (who purposely avoided drafting Matt Weiters due to a high salary demand) I'm done with this team.

I hope we get Tex, but everyone knew that was a long shot at best... if most baseball fans in DC don't even want to watch the Nats then why would Tex want to PLAY for them when he could play for Boston or LA? Here's to staying with the "plan" of another 100+ loss season and hopefully this will lead to the firing of Bowden and Kasten. In Rizzo I trust.

Posted by: PNatsFan | December 13, 2008 11:12 AM | Report abuse

We are a couple weeks into free agency. That the Nats haven't addressed all of their needs isn't an indication that they won't. You may believe that, but I choose to believe that with the glut of outfielders and a rather pedestrian free-agent market (outside the top guys), the Nats will make some moves and fill some spots.

Posted by: Cavalier83 | December 13, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

JayB,

Relax, breath. Now come down from the ledge.

It's only mid December. They seem to be willing to spend some money and make some moves in FA, unlike the last 2 years. I'm willing to sit back and wait and hope.

Now, in two months if they have not signed anyone other than the typical Bowden retreads, I will be on the ledge with you.

Posted by: Section505203 | December 13, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Scooter - I tend to agree about the relative value of Tex vs. Dunn as ballplayers. The wild card is Tex's value to the Lerners as a marketing tool. He's a marketer's dream.
As far as baseball goes, would I rather see Tex than Dunn? You Bet. But the market seems to have dropped for Dunn. With current economics, Dunn may be willing to take a 2-4 year deal and wait till the econ turns around so he can sign a big contract while still relatively young. Now your looking at 10/200 for Tex or possibly 2/26ish for Dunn. Big difference. Plus with Dunn, you could keep NJ and pray he can last long enough to raise his trade value - if not, Dunn could play 1b. I for one would love to see Johnson, Dukes, Dunn at 3-4-5. Both NJ and Dukes have the discipline to wait on a fastball, and with Dunn back there you know they are going to see some fat ones. All 3 have 400 obp potential. A pitcher's nightmare.

Posted by: Dogface13 | December 13, 2008 11:20 AM | Report abuse

see you there then.....Much like other “Change” campaigns......in the end you just get Clinton (Bowden) retreads.

Posted by: JayBeee | December 13, 2008 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Section406 brings up something I hadn't really noticed: if you concentrate on the last few years, Teixeira certainly does seem to be moving up through the pack. Dunn has performed pretty consistently since he was 21 (21! in the majors! with an OPS+ of 136!), which has its own value, but Tex is actually getting better.

I was looking more at career and typical-season numbers and didn't notice Tex's improvement (the split stat lines, due to his trades, make it harder to see).

Posted by: Scooter_ | December 13, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

The Nats can't make any other significant moves until they know what Tex does -- and I don't believe for one second that the effort to get Tex was just a smoke and mirror PR play -- there's nothing insignificant about 8/160 and Bowden said on the radio that the offer was upped so I really don't know what their last offer is - ultimately, it may not matter how much money the Nats put on the table for Tex -- we'll just have to wait and see how this all plays out

Posted by: Terpsrule | December 13, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

JayBeee,

Amen.

How many offseasons of not spending and only signing Reds is it going to take for some of you to wake up and smell the Anacostia? It stinks.

Keep the payroll down. This is all a set-up to sell the team within five years.

Posted by: Batboy05 | December 13, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

I think the Lerners are serious and I don't think that its an automatic that Tex is going to choose the Angels (or Red Sox) for that matter if the Nats bid is equal or perhaps a little greater. This perception, as far as I can tell, comes from the national media that operates on a presumption that no one would prefer to play for the Nationals (or Baltimore) than for the Red Sox or Angels. Texeira, who is from the area, just may not prefer the Red Sox just because they are the Red Sox. It ain't over yet.

But my concern is the same one Nats execs have -- i.e., that Boras is just using our offer to get more from others. And, in the meantime, Dunn, Fuentes, and others we could use, might be gone by the time the Boras bidding war is over. I think it may be time for the Lerners to make that final offer and set a time frame to accept it. If Boras and Tex keep screwing around, pull the offer off the table and sign Dunn. You can't let them both walk.

I think the real difference between Tex and Dunn is defense. But the production is the same, and Dunn's OPS is pretty good, if I'm not mistaken.

I don't agree that there's a big marketing difference between Dunn and Tex. I really like Dunn (but I am admittedly a recovering former Reds fan). I think he'd be a modern day Frank Howard here. And that's a really good thing.

One thing I don't understand. Why does any bid on Fuentes have to wait for Tex to make up his mind? I understand Dunn having to wait (although I disagree with it, we could use both of 'em) but no matter what Boras does with Tex we still are going to need a closer. WHY WAIT?? Dave S., can you please ask this question?

Posted by: raymitten | December 13, 2008 11:45 AM | Report abuse

But the real question is "will they?" sign the "consolation prizes".

They lost out on Crow over a couple hundred thousand bucks, will they be similarly stupid on Tex? My gut tells me yes!

For that matter, I seem to recall the Nats having one of the highest revenues, as well as lowest payrolls in baseball. The majority of their offseason moves to date seem to have been driven by squeezing maximum profits out of the team. Lerners can certainly afford to up their offer to Tex. Based on what I've seen from them in the past I am skeptical.

This team continues to make foolish, stupid, and bumbling mistakes. They seem much more interested in the Nationals as an investment to improve their bottom line. They have done very little in the international market this year as well. I've seen no major improvement in the farm system relative to last year. The way they are running this team reminds me of greedy CEOs who churn out a piss poor product and squeeze the buyers for every penny they can get - then claim large bonuses for themselves and get richer (see Ford, GM, Chrysler).

I want the Nats to succeed, I have just seen very little to get me really excited and I sincerely hope I am wrong on all this.

It's like Santa Claus, I really WANT to believe.

And if we land Tex, I'll gladly eat crow (the bird not the pitcher)...

Posted by: DesertNat | December 13, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Scooter, the other thing worth noting is that conventional wisdom holds that power declines with age before the other skills. I've always wanted to actually analyze that, but never had the time.

The thinking is that in addition to a sweet swing, being able to muscle a ball is important to power. The swing remains (Griffey, Jr.), but a lose of strength is the dictum of nature.

Dunn has a good swing, but I don't know if I'd call it Griffeyesque, which increases the probability that as he ages his power will diminish. Probably same for Teixeira. But Teixeira has more than one trick.

Also, can we chill the Aaron Boone out about the offers? I'll tell you what it means: someone else has claimed to match the Nationals' offer. Finis. Raise your hand if you don't think Scott Boras is going to call Washington and ask for a counter-counter-offer.

Posted by: Section506 | December 13, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Shhhh, peace, DesertNat. Your witty and soul-bearing post succinctly summarizes everyone's fears. But, remember, real estate tycoons don't buy baseball teams to make a profit. They buy them because it sounds fun.

I think you have more to fear that the Lerners have a twisted vision of how to build a team than they just want money. Be afraid of a stingy Danny Snyder, not Gordon Gekko.

Posted by: Section506 | December 13, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

oh lord Jesus.

Jaybee where the hell were you when it was believed that the Nats made the High bid?

I didn't see you anywhere spouting your crap.

the Nationals have had the high bid all week, and you were nowhere to be found.

now all of a sudden the Angels decide to match our bid and now here you come with your whining. it's like you WANT the Lerners to not succeed so that you can say "I told you so".

calm the hell down and let the bidding play out.

8/160 is STILL a serious, competitive offer, because NOBODY HAS TOPPED IT.

We have the SAME offer as the Angels and we offered our FIRST. There is nothing "cheap" in that. If we have the SAME OFFER as another team, and Tex chooses to go to the other team, you absolutely cannot fault the Lerners for it, unless you have an agenda, which apparently JayBee does.

and it isn't like Tex is the ONLY PLAYER ON THE MARKET. If we lose out on Tex, then fine. we offer Dunn, we offer Hudson, and we offer a Pitcher.

the "Lerner is Cheap" crap just because someone decided to match our offer is absolutely ridiculous. STFU with this already.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 12:21 PM | Report abuse

and with that said, the Lerners need to go ahead and raise their bid. go 10/200 with a 5 year opt-out and a no-trade.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

I think 10/200, 5yr opt-out, no-trade should be the final offer, also. I would also offer it as the second offer, and try to blow everyone out. The first offer draws out the bids (btw, how insulting for a team you helped make a run to merely match - and a week later - the offer from the last place team) and the second offer makes the other bidders think again.

Though I reluctantly say no on Dunn and Hudson still. I just don't see what they gain in the long run, other than large contracts that will make them hard to trade when they're holding up young 'uns in four or five years.

Posted by: Section506 | December 13, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

I think 10/200, 5yr opt-out, no-trade should be the final offer, also. I would also offer it as the second offer, and try to blow everyone out. The first offer draws out the bids (btw, how insulting for a team you helped make a run to merely match - and a week later - the offer from the last place team) and the second offer makes the other bidders think again.

Though I reluctantly say no on Dunn and Hudson still. I just don't see what they gain in the long run, other than large contracts that will make them hard to trade when they're holding up young 'uns in four or five years.
--------------------

absolutely. I don't understand why everyone is whining and crying because the Angels MATCHED our offer. they didn't BEAT it, they MATCHED it. as in, the offered the exact same as we did. is the Angels Owner "cheap" too, then? well, Jaybeee has a personal grudge against the lerners and he needs them to fail to placate his ego, so I understand why he's crying and whining. but everyone else, I don't get it.

just a day ago, we were the happiest people on the planet, because we had the High Bid. someone decided to match the bid and everyone instantly turns into simpering little crybabies.

and as for Dunn/Hudson..that's not necessarily a longterm move. it's a "let's not repeat last season" move.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Here's a new thought - Now that Harris is signed for two years, why not slip him into CF? Willingham, Milledge, Dukes & Kearns fill the corners on a match-up basis, and CF if there is an IF injury that moves Harris? Could solve the leadoff / CF problem with no further outlay.

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse


Here's a new thought - Now that Harris is signed for two years, why not slip him into CF? Willingham, Milledge, Dukes & Kearns fill the corners on a match-up basis, and CF if there is an IF injury that moves Harris? Could solve the leadoff / CF problem with no further outlay.

--------

let him compete with Hernandez at 2B.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

just a day ago, we were the happiest people on the planet, because we had the High Bid. someone decided to match the bid and everyone instantly turns into simpering little crybabies.

-----------

and just to add on to this:

WE STILL HAVE THE HIGH OFFER.

so what is everyone whining about?

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

I dunno, Mr. Madison, after his heroics last year, I would also not mind seeing him in centerfield every day. It's worth remembering, though, that Harris has never been a great everyday player. He is a pretty good one (he actually does better than when used as a replacement), but he also he certainly gives Manny immense flexibility coming off the bench.

Our insurance policy is Willie Harris.

Not much talk of this, but our outfield is now Willingham, Dukes, Milledge, Kearns, Pena, and Harris. If Tex comes to town, Harris could become true utility man, but one of those outfielders needs to go.

Who?

Posted by: Section506 | December 13, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

MrMadison: I think JayBeee, SoCH, & Batboy just need to meet at a downtown bar, order a few "top-rail" single-malts & console one another over their shared pain.

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 12:47 PM | Report abuse

Wow, e lot of emotions being spilled out today. At least that means the fanbase is paying attention to what is going on. I refuse to look at this in a negative fashion. The Nats should take the initiative (if they already haven't) to show a willingness to negotiate upwards if necessary, in incentives if need be. Perhaps they could add a clause that if attendance reaches a certain number, they would add value to the contract. It would be great to see the little team that couldn't come through for a change. An infusion of trust from the owner to the fans would go a long way to creating a larger loyal fanbase.

Posted by: cokedispatch | December 13, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

506: Kearns & Pena currently have little or no value, but that could change in ST. If the Nats' are looking for a deal over the next 60 days, Milledge becomes the best 'bait' (Willingham is under Arbitration / negotiation & is less attractive in a trade).

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

coked: I think player contract incentives have to be structured off accomplishments, and cannot be based on things like attendance. Interesting idea, though.

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Jaybee misspelled: Can someone show me where they are seeing evedence of Lerner spending some cash.....

Let's see - $450 million for a team just 2.5 years ago; $30 million in stadium improvements - that's $480 million - that count?

No? How about all the front office salaries? How about last year's payroll? How about the $10 million or so they ate for Lopez, Lo Duca and Estrada? How about the $6 million Cordero made?

Before you throw stones, ask yourself - What have YOU done for the Nats lately? You a season ticket holder? You bought a hoodie or a hat? This ALL goes into making us competitive. We have to support this team for it to spend. You don't take money from one business and apply it to another - that dooms both to failure.

And Batboy05 - go back under your rock, will ya?

Okay - my point is:
I think the market has indicated to Tex what it's willing to bear. He knows 'about' what kind of dough is out there - now he just gets to decide where he wants to play.

Come to DC Tex! We have a nice, new locker for ya, a fan base hungry for baseball and there ARE some guys here who can play this game.

Posted by: dand187 | December 13, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

and don't get me wrong, I fall on the "Lerners are Cheap" side in most cases, but this one I just can't see it.

they are right in the thick of this, they haven't given a low-ball bid, and their bid had to be matched by the favored teams, their offer is significant and still on the high end of the spectrum in terms of bids.

the Orioles are the ones who gave a lowball offer.

nothing about this process says "Cheap" to me. I can't really fault the Lerners at all for how they've handled this. they've done everything right so far.

now all they need to do is raise their bid.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

506: Additionally, the OF has Bernadina, Davis, & Maxwell - the Nats' have some depth there, so a trade (OF for SP) wouldn't be out of the question, if someone fits the need.

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

I have been a Season Ticket holder since 2005. I want a team that wins and makes progress each year....this team has gone backwards every year. They had to have much more than the top bid to win Tex. Others just have to match to win....not so for the Nats.....Past history tells us the Nats do not intent to spend what it takes to win the Tex. Problem is they are wasting time and effort. Look at a team like the Mets.....they need to fix the bull pen.....3 days later they have the job done.....Nats....nothing fixed....nothinga done.

Posted by: JayBeee | December 13, 2008 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Problem is they are wasting time and effort. Look at a team like the Mets.....they need to fix the bull pen.....3 days later they have the job done.....Nats....nothing fixed....nothinga done.

------

so Basically Tex isn't making his mind up fast enough for you, because K-Rod decided to sign immediately because NOBODY ELSE was interested in him, and the Mets made a trade.

I mean, it's not like Tex is the biggest FA hitter on the market or anything, the Nats should have already locked him up because nobody else is bidding on him, and his agent isn't Scott Boras who loves to drag these things out.

oh wait....

the Nationals should have signed Tex, Dunn, Hudson, and 3 pitchers all in 2 days, otherwise they are cheap and failures. right?

Past History tells you what you want it to. the 8/160 we put down for Tex says otherwise. if we weren't willing to pay what it takes, we'd have lowballed him like the Orioles did.

your agenda against the Lerners won't allow you to see that though.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

oh, and the Olson/Willingham trade doesn't count as "something done" because neither of them costs 20m a year, right?

Jay, you are just whining to hear yourself whine.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 1:22 PM | Report abuse

if we don't win Tex, I'm not faulting the Lerners here. they've done what they should have. they made a competitive, high offer.

if we lose out, then we immediately turn to Dunn.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

How do we know the Nats have the high offer? Does anyone know what Boston's offering?

Anyway, the GHF in me thinks that our offer, being first and all, was perfect. It was high enough to be serious but not outrageous. And (again GHF) it gives us room to go bigger if/when the big boys show up.

I'm trying to contain the giddiness that's starting to bubble up.

Posted by: NatsNut | December 13, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Madison......make sure you come back and explain away the failure to sign Tex, Dunn and any starting pitcher in Feb.......I could be wrong and I will be the first to say so if they do any one of the three items above.......Hope you will be willing to see the facts in Feb.

Posted by: JayBeee | December 13, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Madison......make sure you come back and explain away the failure to sign Tex, Dunn and any starting pitcher in Feb.......I could be wrong and I will be the first to say so if they do any one of the three items above.......Hope you will be willing to see the facts in Feb.

----------
if we don't sign anyone, there will be nothing to explain away, and no excuses.

but if we do, then you shut up and don't post here for about a month.

deal?

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

What is your end of the deal.....I like beer......how about a drink at the Red Roof......We will both need it if they sign no majore fee agent. Deal

Posted by: JayBeee | December 13, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

MrMadison: Greatgoogly-moogilins! - As Frank Zappa also wrote, you "jumped up-n-down on the chest of him".
8/160M is now clearly not the bottom line, and I don't think the Lerners' are done yet. Maybe a 9/185M counter with two opt-outs, or the full 10/200+ (that might be a reach).

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Rank speculation here: The Mets may be in trouble right now, as Wilpon's hedge fund may have lost billions investing in Madoff's Ponzi scheme. Query: Were the Lerners in there, too? It seems that Madoff targeted not only Jewish charities but also wealthy Jewish businessmen.

Posted by: fischy | December 13, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

What is your end of the deal.....I like beer......how about a drink at the Red Roof......We will both need it if they sign no majore fee agent. Deal

----------
that's fine.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

C'mon, Mr. Madison. JayB may be a pessimist, but he always tries to be a fair pessimist. I rarely agree with his conclusions, but unlike many other pessimists on blogs, he always bases his negative conclusion on an interpretation of facts, not fancy. Sure you may not want to invite him to your party if you're looking for a positive atmosphere (though he can also be very positive at times), but that's not grounds for lashing out at him.

And trust, me, I know, I've debated with JayB for a long time now. He is a positive for this blog, albeit in a sorta negative way.

Posted by: Section506 | December 13, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

and it's a hot stove!

raise that offer. i'm comfortable whatever they want to pay as long as it's not an excuse not to do something else in the future.

how about 8/176mil?

Posted by: longterm | December 13, 2008 1:58 PM | Report abuse

natsNut: Don't think the Evil Empires 1 & 1A have made an offer yet, or Team Boros would have leaked something. So far, the opined / reported bids for Teixeira are Orioles (7/140+), Angels (either 7/150 or 8/160) & Nationals (8/160), with the NYY bid TBA; the Red Sox would have to "way over" the top IMO, due to the draft dis-information campaign back when Teixeira was coming out of H.S.

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Hey I love the Nats. I liked the Olson, Willingham deal. I loved the Lopez cut in August but it was $5 Million and 6 months late. My problem is I care about the quality of baseball I pay for. Last year was the worst baseball I have ever seen. I am angry that each year this team put a poorer product on the field. Each year they dig in the trash in Feb for starting pitching and to fill holes. This year they got more sophisticated and faked many of you out.....but I still do not see any pitching, CFer, 1B, or bull pen help yet.....When it is here I will be the first one to say job well done.

Posted by: JayBeee | December 13, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Wow, Lots of emotion today.

If you look at what happened this week from a purely business standpoint, you will notice that the Lerners are playing their cards quite well. I may be mistaken, but weren't they the first to make an offer? They set the market by doing that - they offered Tex what he was asking for annually and slightly under - 8 years instead of 10. This is simply good business. Haven't any of you bought a house or a car? Don't you want to pay something less than sticker?

Off season, I am a Saints fan (although after Thursday's game I am reconsidering). Many moons ago, Ditka put everything on the table to get Ricky 'Bong Hit' Williams. I have blocked the details from my memory, but I remember something about 'trading all of his drafts picks for the next three years' to get him. Remember how it helped the Saints get to the SuperBowl that year? No? How's Ricky doing these days?

While I think that pursuing Tex is a good move (and a lower risk than my example), they need to do it in such a way where is makes business sense. If Tex is interested incoming here, BorASS will come back to the Nats and say 'Give me your best offer', and they will, and it will be higher than the original offer - because NO ONE shows their entire hand when negotiating. Well, Except Ditka.

Oh, let's not forget the fact that Tex will be 39 in 10 years...

Posted by: CajunD | December 13, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

yea, last year was bad.

Posted by: longterm | December 13, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Only if they live in DC, which many don't. No payroll tax here, per everyone else's congressmembers.

*********
dc will be happy to finally get some taxes off these player salaries.

Posted by: longterm | December 12, 2008 1:58 PM

Posted by: CEvansJr | December 13, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

My problem is I care about the quality of baseball I pay for.

-----

yeah, cause nobody else here cares like you do.

sorry 506, but I'm trying to see just how hard I can roll my eyes here.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

we don't "need" CF help. not the kind of CF help that the team is looking at.

move Dukes to Center, and leave it at that.

we need 1B, Bullpen, and another SP. Olsen was a good pickup, but we need one more.

for 1B we go all-in for Tex, and if that doesn't work, we go for Dunn.

for Bullpen, Joe Nelson got non-tendered by the Marlins, as did Takashi Saito by the Dodgers. both were non-tendered due to cheapness, not lack of talent. I'd sign both of them right now before someone else does.

SP, I dunno. take a 1-year flier on Mark Prior, or look at Garland.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

we don't "need" CF help. not the kind of CF help that the team is looking at.

move Dukes to Center, and leave it at that.

----

just to clarify, I am advocating an outfield of Milledge-Dukes-Willingham, as opposed to going out and signing a "CFer" like Willy Tavares.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps the Lerners want to buy a top of the line car......perhaps they just want to impress their friends by talking about the test drives they took. I want to believe them but I honestly feel they have no intention of spending that money. At best they are looking to grease the skids for their top pick in June which will cost some one time cash. Nope to me this is all a smoke screen to distract from the product they put on the field last year.....good business maybe, clearly Mr. Madison is buying it, but it is just a short term solution....they still need to play games in April.....time will tell.

Posted by: JayBeee | December 13, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

JayBeee: Could it possibly be that the Lerners' are finally up to speed on the business of Baseball? Give it until ST - if the end product hasn't improved by then, by all means lash out.

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

I agree Dukes would be fine in CF but then we need a RF or LF that can hit a ton......not Milledge that is for sure.

Oh and I note your change in tone Mr. M....and I agree lets move fast to pick up that bull pen help we need......let me know in 48 hours if anything happens.....

Prior....come on.....now I see why we don't agree. No more bottom of the barrel starters please. We need a pitcher in his prime. Clearly you do not care that much about the quality of baseball you pay for if you think Prior is what this team should go to spring training with as our off season improvement.

Posted by: JayBeee | December 13, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

I want to believe them but I honestly feel they have no intention of spending that money. At best they are looking to grease the skids for their top pick in June which will cost some one time cash. Nope to me this is all a smoke screen to distract from the product they put on the field last year.
--------

of course you think that.

I get the feeling that Tex, Dunn, Hudson, Sheets, and Fuentes could be standing at a press conference next to Bowden, holding up Nats Jerseys with their names on them, and you'd say the exact same thing I've quoted here.

maybe I'm gullible. maybe I'm stupid. but I'm choosing to believe that the Lerners are wary enough of repeating last season that they'll improve the team.

but unlike you, I don't care HOW they do it, and I don't care how much money they do/don't spend. I just want the team to make large improvements. they can sign FAs, Trade players, draft and develop, I don't care.

as long as the team acquires the players necessary to make a large improvement over last season, I don't care how "cheap" or "expensive" it is. I don't measure improvement in dollars. I measure it in wins and losses. if we can win with a 20m payroll, then fine. if we can't and we have to raise the payroll significantly, then that's fine too.

which is why I will be equally pleased if we sign Tex for 200m, or if we sign Dunn for 60m.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

I think the general parameters of the deal Teixeira will sign are pretty much set.

About 8 years and about $160,000,000.

Someone might go 9/180, but I don't know if that would actually "get it done" since the only way he gets to year 9 or 10 in this contract is if he hurt or the economy tanks so bad that there won't be another 20+mil/year deal for another decade.

The decision will be based (IMO) on;

1. How many years till an opt-out clause
2. No-Trade protection (full, partial or vested)
3. Non-Contract financial opportunities
4. Bonus and incentives
5. Winning now vs winning in '10/'11, etc

I think for the Nats to take this they give just enough extra dollars to top CC's contract total and give Teixeira the "perks" so let's say;

8 years, 164,000,000, full no-trade, opt out after year 4 (or 3?), $1,000,000 bonus each for All-Star appearance and gold glove and $5,000,000 for leading the league in any major batting category (HRs, BA, etc).

Posted by: estuartj | December 13, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

"How's Ricky doing these days?"

Groovy.

Haha, Mr. Madison, calling out on factual inaccuracies is a well-entrenched tradition in baseball, I don't think even JayB will object to that. You could have also nit-picked about how 2007 was a better season than 2006, though JayB still has a point that losing bad isn't really better than losing badder.

I will be my usual slightly restrained optimistic until the deal is done.

When Mark Teixeira comes to Washington, the Nats will be a front page story in the Post.

Posted by: Section506 | December 13, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

SP - I was just throwing out names. I'm not really fond of giving big contracts to FA starting pitchers. they tend to be unreliable health-wise unless you develop them internally.

I don't wanna end up with a Carl Pavano who can't stay healthy, or a Barry Zito who cashes in and then sucks to high hell, you know?

I'd rather trade for or develop Starting Pitching, honestly.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

The question I forgot to add is with MASN owning the TV rights, can the Nats produced a "MARK TEIXEIRA SHOW" on MASN or Channel 20 or a network?

So just for fun...and I posted this on NFA yesterday, IF we sign Teixeira would that be enough of a committement ot winning to get Jake Peavy to waive his No-Trade clause for the Nats. If he did, what package would it take to get Peavy from SD and is he worth it. My best guess on the necessary package;

Jake Peavy (SP) for Jordan Zimmermann, Balester or Martis, Davis or Rhinehart and 1 more pitcher from Detwiler, Willems, VanAllen, Carr, Zincola.

That's 4 for 1 including 3 pitcher, is Peavey worth that? How many games do the Nats win (without any other major moves besides Teixeira and Peavy) in '09?

Posted by: estuartj | December 13, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

Well now we can agree....I also do not care how they improve. I just do not see improvement yet.....I would say it has been a wash so far. Lost Redding, Perez, Bonofocio, Rauch and picked up Olson and Willingham.........that is not going to improve this team at all.

Posted by: JayBeee | December 13, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

The Nationals have a few players that can play CF (Bernadina, Dukes, Harris, Kearns, Maxwell, & Milledge) on the roster already. Why are the rumours about acquiring a CF, then they should be looking at SP?

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Well now we can agree....I also do not care how they improve. I just do not see improvement yet.....I would say it has been a wash so far. Lost Redding, Perez, Bonofocio, Rauch and picked up Olson and Willingham.........that is not going to improve this team at all.
----------

just something to think about here:

1. Redding is gonna go to Colorado and get DEMOLISHED. Vindicator is not good. he's a bottom-barrel pitcher, the likes of which you railed against in a previous post. we'll have 4 or 5 of Him trying to beat out our young rooks Jordan Zimmerman and Shairon Martis to make the roster in ST anyway.

2. Perez = Redding.

3. In the Winter Leagues, Bonifacio, despite being a 2B by trade, is playing the Outfield for Licey right now. Why? Because there is a young man playing 2B for Licey who is absolutely owning the league right now(.372/.409/.552) and playing Bonifacio over him there cannot be justified.

That man plays for the Washington Nationals.

I don't think losing Bonifacio, Redding, and Perez is as drastic a situation as you are portraying it to be.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

essentially, we turned Rauch into Olsen and Willingham.

I'd say that's a pretty good haul for a Set-Up man. I've got no complaints about Bowden's dealings there.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

huh..we just signed a bunch of minor league deals.

details forthcoming.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

estuart: The trade you propose might be worth between 6-10 wins in 2009, but would cost the Nationals long-term. Giving up high-end MiL pitchers like J. Zimmermann, Balestar & Detwiler for a SP who will jump off-roster in three years is what kills teams.
Here's the mantra to follow: When trading, give up prospect players for pitchers, and acquire prospect pitchers for players; Avoid giving up pitchers for pitchers, or players for players.

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

nothing major really. just signing Organizational Depth, none of these guys have a serious shot at making the team, I think.

we signed 13 guys to minor league deals with ST invites.

most of these we knew about already, they are just being officially announced now.

Infielders:
Freddie Bynum
Brad Eldred
Joel Guzman
Pete Orr
Matt Whitney

OF:
Ryan Langerhans
Jorge Padilla
Mike Vento

Pitchers:
Bobby Brownlie
Preston Larrison
J.D. Martin
Ryan Wagner
Justin Jones

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

J.D. Martin is a sleeper pick though. he's from the Indians system.

scouting report from before last season:

-----------------------
Coming into 2007, it looked like the J.D. Martin of old was back and that he was primed for a breakout year. Once again, he looks great going into 2008 and the Indians are very excited with what they saw from him in the Fall Development Program and winter league stint. At 25 years of age, Martin's prospect clock is getting close to striking midnight, and 2008 will be a big year for him. He should anchor the Akron rotation to start the season.
---------------

2.49 ERA, 1.15 WHIP in 79 ip in AA last year after recovering from an Injury.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Just saw the same release (via NFA). Ladies & Gentlemen, your 2009 Syracuse Chiefs.

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

from NFA about Joel Guzman:

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

Joel Guzman is a name familiar to prospect hounds. He was signed back in 2001 by the LA Dodgers to a $2.25M bonus. He was in the Dodgers top prospect lists for five years going from #3 in 2002 to #9 in 2003 to #11 in 2004 to #1 in 2005 [#5 in all of baseball] to #3 in 2006. He was dealt to the Rays in 2006 for Julio Lugo. Guzman stayed on the BBA map for TB at #11 in 2007 and #29 in 2008. It is not a matter of skills with Guzman as scouts see him as a five-tool guy. It’s makeup and attitude that has held him back. BBA had this about him in 2008 ” he fails to get the most from his talent because he doesn’t make adjustments. He doesn’t play with much energy and dsiplays an apathetic approach to improving his skills.” Guzman has only played briefly in the majors over his seven professional seasons. He has become predominantly a third baseman/corner outfielder. The one thing he has going for him is his age. Guzman only turned 24 in November so he still has time. Whether a new organization finally kick starts him is an enormous question. A nice gamble for a team that can afford to give it a shot.
----------------

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 3:08 PM | Report abuse

So here is a good example of JayBee's logical negativism, Mr. Madison. Both of you agree on the same thing: that changes have been made, but he sees them as no improvement and you see them as an improvement.

I think that a statistical analysis of the changes so far would show that they have an about even chance of turning our well or poor. Why I don't mind JayB, vis-a-vis Haters, is that he's not saying the team won't be good because no good players will ever come to this joke team, but because he expects the chance of failure is greater than the chance of success.

I mostly agree with you on the points you made, except that Perez is better than Redding as a starter, and Redding is better than Perez for 2 - 3 innings.

Posted by: Section506 | December 13, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Sports, politics, married life: take the passion out of it and it's easy to figure out.

I know many of you won't agree with this, but the Nationals aren't a bad team. Offensively, they are a good team (if they could just stay healthy).

Here is your Nationals' offense for 2009 based on actual production in games played multiplied out to an entire 162 game season:

1B: Nick Johnson (2006 + 10% for missed games)
.290-25-85 - .948 OPS
2B: Ronnie Belliard (2008 + 100% for missed games)
.287-22-92 - .845 OPS
SS: Cristian Guzman (2008 + 15% for missed games)
.316-10-63 - .785 OPS
3B: Ryan Zimmerman (career ave. for 162 games)
.282-21-94 - .803 OPS
LF: Josh Willingham (career ave. for 162 games)
.266-25-85
CF: Lastings Milledge (2008 +18% for missed games)
.268-17-73 (28 SB) - .732 OPS
RF: Elijah Dukes (2008 + 100% for missed games)
.264-26-88 (26 SB) - .864 OPS
C: Jesus Flores (career ave. for 162 games)
.252-12-81 - .698 OPS

There are some caveats in those numbers to be sure. Belliard's career numbers show he'd probably hit 17 homers and not 22. And Elijah Dukes didn't hit a homer until June 5th because of his injury, which means he hit all of his 13 homers in just 58 post-injury games (a pace for 37 homers). Jesus Flores would never play 162 games, so his numbers are inflated.

If these Nationals players stay healthy and play every day, and just do over a full season what they've done over parts of seasons, the Nationals' offense would be potent. These starters would hit .278 with 158 homers (20 per player) and 661 RBI's (82 per player).

The potential is there for hope in 2009. If they can just stay healthy .....

Posted by: rushfari | December 13, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Clearly we're not getting Tex. We should just sign Dunn and the O-Dawg. We can play Dunn in the outfield while Nick Johnson shows he's healthy, then trade Nick Johnson for whatever we can get.

The Nats have to invest their money in the draft this year and get the two best players at one and nine.

Posted by: BillyBeane | December 13, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Lemme ask a theoretical question.

suppose we don't get Tex.

which would you prefer..

Manny on a 3 year deal, with Willingham playing 1B, or Dunn playing 1B on a 5 year deal?

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

MrMadison: Neither - IF, and only if the Nationals' don't land Teixeira, do they consider signing Dunn for no more than a 3-yr, $39M deal. Teixeira could be a once-in-a-decade opportunity - alongside RZimm, who knows what could come of that?
Dunn has to be viewed as a short-term option only; there are possible options in the pipeline (Whitsell, Marrero, Whitney) who could step up between 2010-2012.
Manny, while admitedly the best 'pure hitter' currently in the majors, would be a cancer in the Nats' clubhouse - there aren't enough vocal, tenured players to keep him from poisioning the younger players. If "Big Papi" gave up on him in BOS, who could handle him here?

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Dunn at 1B, Man-ny (get in there) in LF. And you're still only at 80 million payroll. See, Dunn's just not enough for this team, and his price is falling, unless another team wakes up, I mean, if the team thinks Kearns was worth $9 million, then what's the big deal about paying Dunn 10 or 11?

I don't see why they need to artificially limit themselves to just one big bat. Because they clearly need more than one.

Posted by: Brue | December 13, 2008 4:34 PM | Report abuse

BinM - just a nitpick. Whitesell is in the DBacks system now, not ours.

replace Whitesell with Bill Rhinehart.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

and why would you pay Dunn 3/39 when Ibanez signed for 3/30? if you are gonna go 39m then you may as well go 4/40 which matches Ibanez' 10m per season. which is fine with me.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

>Manny, while admitedly the best 'pure hitter' currently in the majors, would be a cancer in the Nats' clubhouse - there aren't enough vocal, tenured players to keep him from poisioning the younger players.

Professional athletes don't care about all that rah-rah kiddie crap - that's little league stuff. When they see him on the exercise bike or elliptical the morning after a game, when they see that he watches hours upon hours of video on opposing pitchers, they'll start to get the message that it ain't about what you look like, or whether you're misunderstood by the public, then they'll follow suit. Who wouldn't want to emulate Man-ny as a hitter? You can learn so much by just being around the guy every day, the little things he does to preserve himself and get ready for the night's contest. I know one thing - this team didn't watch nearly enough video on their opponents. When it looks like Man-ny knows what's coming, that's because he does.

Posted by: Brue | December 13, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Brue: Manny's a head-case - he's the LAST thing that the Nationals' need in the clubhouse. He's the baseball equivalent to T.O. in the NFL; A great player on the field, but an absolute cancer in the clubhouse, especially when things aren't going his way.

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Yeah he did some pretty scary things last year in Boston. I will admit that. But he was there for almost 8 years, and at some point, it's like all relationships - it changes and sometimes it ends. Nobody ever said he wasn't a head case, but I believe that he's not malicious. I truly believe that. That makes him redeemable, imo. Although I'm not so sure the rest of the GMs in the league think so. I just can't get over the fact that when he joined the Dodgers, they weren't doing anything offensively, and he got them into the playoffs. That was a major miracle. And it wasn't like they crawled in a game or two over .500, they got on a roll. We might not be playoff ready next year, but we sure as hell could get up to around .500 with him, and who knows after that?

Posted by: Brue | December 13, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

MrMadison: Thanks for the catch on Whitesell/Rhinehart - my bad. Dunn's salary over Ibanez - because 1) he's younger, and 2) he can (purportedly) play more than 1 position; 3/39 would be my top-end price, if I were in the Nats' FO.

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

It ain't over til its over. I'll see you all, well, maybe some of you, in Viera. I can remember a 33 year stretch of time when this blog couldn't exist. I'm thankful for that. Merry Christmas

Posted by: cokedispatch | December 13, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Brue: He's a GREAT hitter; Manny just needs to go to an perceived playoff contender (& lots of stroking) in order to remain effective. Boras needs to sell him to either LA team, either CHI team, or either NY team. I doubt he'd get the treatment he wanted in the WAS clubhouse, and he'd turn on them.
His best fit would be in either Anaheim, Chavez Ravine, or Wrigley, with managers who could deal with him.

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

coked: Hope that wasn't your last word until ST. If so, a happy holidays to you & yours; Hope to hear from you soon.

Posted by: BinM | December 13, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

I love it when the thread is so long that I skip 5 hours of it just to post an interlocutory response.

Dunn vs. Tex - over 162 games, Tex's line would average .290 / .378 / .541, while Dunn is .247 / .381 / .518. The batting average difference shows up in doubles - 40 v 29. .020 in OPS is significant. While many tend to disrespect Dunn's power due to Cinci's ballpark (wrongly, I/M/O), don't forget that most of Tex's career was in another launching pad, the "Stadium W Built" (w/ state money). The 3 year trends probably mean something, too. Defense and athleticism have something to do with valuation, too. There's probably a thought that Tex can hold it together longer.

I've been saying that I thought Tex would end up with the 2d highest AAV of any position player, so I have not thought $20m per would end up closing the door on other bidders. 8 / $20m was Manny's contract in 2001. Even with the bad economic situation, I thought Tex would blow that out of the water. I don't think it was a bad faith offer. It was more a smoke out the competition offer.

I don't think you'll see many of the big contract position players sign before Tex. He says he'd like to sign before 12/25, and today's 12/13 - by my math, that's 12 days. This will be over soon, then the next tier starts falling.

Ibanez did not want to be the last bat unsigned, and jumped at the offer he said he always wanted from the Mariners but could not get. My guess is the Phillies said, "We'd rather give you this money, but if you don't take, Burrell will," and that sealed the deal.

Posted by: jca-CrystalCity | December 13, 2008 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Binm
Yeah the winner part is something they can't match right now. I know that the media would give him a free pass here, and he surely didn't have that in Boston. They can't wait to start screeching about things. Good point about Ac-ta maybe not being mature enough to massage Man-ny, but you know that Terry Francona walked in there pretty much as a rookie manager and learned how to get the most out of him.

Posted by: Brue | December 13, 2008 5:43 PM | Report abuse

When it comes to Mannywood....just say NO. MannyDC has no ring to it.

Posted by: cokedispatch | December 13, 2008 5:51 PM | Report abuse

>When it comes to Mannywood....just say NO. MannyDC has no ring to it.

How about Man-ny harDCore

Posted by: Brue | December 13, 2008 6:12 PM | Report abuse

Regarding Harris's resigning - I've kind of want a Harris / Belliard platoon at 2d if they do not land Hudson. Gonzalez can play full time in Syracuse or be flipped in a package, with Hernandez backing Guz and being in some defensive substitutions (Anderson to 2d, Willie to the OF to replace Willingham or Dunn).

If Peavy would take a trade here (which may be closer to saying "if pigs had wings" than "if Metro is crowded on 1/20"), I think we match up with what SD wants. Recall that the Atlanta trade was supposed to involve Yunel Escobar, Gorkys Hernandez (OF prospect), their top minor league pitching prospect, and 2 other minor league pitchers. WE could start with Milledge and (ghasp) Lannan or Balester, plus A-Gon, and some minor league arms. I think it'd be worth it.

Finally, I wonder what it'd take to get Jason Hammel or Jeff Niemann from the Rays. Both are out of options. They could use a righty bat to platoon with Joyce in right. They were unwilling to give up Niemann and another of their top pitching prospects not named Price for Hermida. I think they want to go cheap rather than Willingham, or they could sign back Baldelli for more or Gomes for less if they wanted.

Posted by: jca-CrystalCity | December 13, 2008 6:12 PM | Report abuse

The Nats have done the right thing. wait for the process...if you can. Say what you want but guys of his quality have other agendas other that an extra 10 million... for us smucks we say yeah gimme the big cash...but we are fans, working stiffs that probably will never see a payday like these Sport Performers that are in the Top 2008 Free Agency. Listen, people are people we care about our lives, our background, where we grew up, where our kids go to school, Ownership has the responsibility, the right, and fiscal responsibility to work a roster. Lerner offered more money than they ever did almost doubling 2 years of payroll...This was not to fail in the offer,I refute any comment at that nature...These and I mean all team Owners, Presidents, GM's, Player Development People and Team Managers are mostly the best,smartest Baseball people, the elite of all baseball management teams. Always voice your opinion but see where our Nats are headed over a 3-5 year plan...
Look at the Sox for what they have done...they probably will not offer Tex 200 for 10 ++ because they Can Walk Away. They set a Value and Stick to it...If Tex does not fall into that value, they Will walk away. I'm off my soap box and hope that Lerner stays with a great five year plan...from my seat in section 240 (great seats)Adios

Posted by: KevmanBGFA | December 13, 2008 6:52 PM | Report abuse

If the Nat up the offer to Tex to 10 years 200 million and they get beat out by another team, I will give the Lerners credit for trying and not getting into a bidding war.
At this stage, everyone and their sister knew that 8/160 wasn't going to get it done, and that INCLUDES the Lerners.
Peersonally, I would have more respect for the Lerners if they just said, "look, we aren't going to break the bank on one player. If someone else wants to go above 8/160, more power to them."
If they want Tex in DC, make the offer: 10/200, 3 year opt out clause and no trade. If he agrees, great, if not, then nobody can say the Lerners didn't try.
Based on their current offer (the one we all knew wasn't going to be enough), I will not give them the benefit of the doubt.

Posted by: TimDz | December 13, 2008 9:02 PM | Report abuse

Felipe Lopez:
“I wasn’t getting a lot of playing time over there in Washington,” Lopez said .

“They are a new franchise, and they are still trying to figure things out. I was not the right fit for that team. It was a good thing for the club to let me go.

“They were kind of holding me back.”

What a putz.

Posted by: psubman | December 13, 2008 9:51 PM | Report abuse

Felipe Lopez:
“I wasn’t getting a lot of playing time over there in Washington,” Lopez said .

“They are a new franchise, and they are still trying to figure things out. I was not the right fit for that team. It was a good thing for the club to let me go.

“They were kind of holding me back.”

What a putz.

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

Boo this man when the DBacks come to town.

BOO THIS MAN.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 13, 2008 10:36 PM | Report abuse

Putz plays for New York.

Posted by: jca-CrystalCity | December 13, 2008 10:54 PM | Report abuse

I love Willie Harris, but Willie is not a starting second baseman. Willie is a super sub. I don't see Belliard as a starter either. Hernandez is unproven as a starter, but he hasn't proven he's not a starter either. I know Belliard's reputation has been good, but his demeanor on the field has always been troubling to me. He appears uninspired and even lacadasical. Harris on the other hand is always hustling. And Hernandez appears more athletic. Not sure what you can get for Beliard, but we don't need three backup second basemen on the team.

Lopez turned out to be a loser and Bonnifacio is talented but we got better than we gave. I'm wondering if we should pursue Wigginton. He could potentially solve a lot of problems for this team. He can play 1B, 2B, 3B, and OF. He has power and can hit up and down the lineup.

Posted by: natbisquit | December 13, 2008 11:27 PM | Report abuse

You guys may want to tune in and watch that Steelers/Ravens game tomorrow.

Word on the street is that Big Tex will be at the game.

And the plot thickens......

Posted by: hollywoodhogan420 | December 14, 2008 12:17 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Madison and JayB,

Nice debate, enjoyed it. JayB-you care, I get and I respect that. You may be to negative for my taste but, you may be right at the end of the day...Lord help us.

My gut feeling, I think the Lerner's are serious here and I think the sorry-arse O's aren't, they did the low-ball then duck and cover thing.

If the Lerner's don't sign Tex then it won't be for a lack of trying and I think they will make a run at Dunn and/or Hudson.

Posted by: Section505203 | December 14, 2008 12:41 AM | Report abuse

natbisquit mentions Belliard appearing lackadaisical. Whenever I see Ronnie Belliard on the field, I remember reading The Fielding Bible, which gave him high marks for making more plays than the average second baseman. Their comment: "He looks too much like Manny Ramirez for people to believe he's a good fielder." (The caveat is that they were looking at one season of data, and it was three years ago, so he may have slowed down since then.) The point is, he sure as shootin' don't look like a keystone sacker, but doggone if he don't make the plays.

About 86 pages back, 506 points out that players lose power as they age. I recall reading a Bill James article, probably in one of the yearly Abstracts. I thought he discovered that most hitters add a few homers and walks in their 30s, probably as they grow more discerning, but a) my recollection could be off; b) he could have been wrong; or c) the game could have changed in the last 20 years or so, rendering his findings moot.

Posted by: Scooter_ | December 14, 2008 7:38 AM | Report abuse

Tom L over at the Times has some interesting opinions on Tex, the Nats and Stan Kasten today. Those who think all is great with the Nats plan and their organizational structure need not read it. While I am often negative over the past 3 years, the product on the field drives that opinion. If and when this team wins more than it loses then I will see the glass more than half full.

If the Lerners up the offer to 100 and $200 Million....that could do it realistically, then I will know they really did want to get Tex. the current 8 and 160 was just to make Boras happy, but not Stan, it seems, which tells that Stan has no real power in the organization and as Tom L says....may also looking for his own exit clause of his own.

Posted by: JayBeee | December 14, 2008 9:22 AM | Report abuse

the 8/160 is currently the high bid, and Jay you are the only person I've seen ANYWHERE say that it was just a token offer "to make Boras happy". everyone else I've seen, from fan to media to quoted executive has said that the offer is serious and impressive. You are the *only* one that I've seen who is 100% convinced that it isn't a serious offer. Maybe you are just the only person who is intelligent among everyone else involved with baseball, or maybe you just have an axe to grind with the Lerners. that remains to be seen.

as I said earlier, if the Lerners have one of the high bids as they do now, and Tex chooses to go elsewhere, then I don't fault the Lerners. The Lerners DID NOT lowball on their bid, as much as you want to believe so.

the Lerners made a serious and competitive offer to Tex. all that remains to be seen is if someone will beat it, and whether the Lerners will match. I don't think you can fairly accuse them of what you are accusing them of in *this* specific instance.

Hypothetical: What if Tex decides to go home to Baltimore and takes their bid, which is a full year and 20m less than ours? What will you say then?

Posted by: MrMadison | December 14, 2008 9:54 AM | Report abuse

and what does the fact that the Angels only matched our 8/160 say about the Angels Ownership?

or do you somehow think that the Lerners 8/160 is LESS serious than the Angels 8/160?

Posted by: MrMadison | December 14, 2008 9:57 AM | Report abuse

I don't see why you are saying that people shouldn't read that Loverro article. there's nothing wrong with it.

It just says that we'll need to give Tex an Opt-Out clause, which is pretty much common sense. we all know that. show of hands, who DOESN'T think we'll need to give Tex an Opt-out in order to land him?

yeah, thought so.

it also contains this gem that you may not enjoy, Jay:

--------
The Nats regained a portion of the credibility they lost over the past several seasons -- they've been the joke of baseball -- by stunning everyone with their financial commitment to Teixeira.
------

I wonder how you "regain a portion of your credibility" and "stun everyone with your financial commitment" by making a nonserious token offer "just to make Boras happy".

and the rest of the article is just regurgitated "Kasten to Toronto" and "Kasten Hates Agents" stuff that we've already known and been over weeks and months(respectively) ago.

what was so "interesting" about it?


Posted by: MrMadison | December 14, 2008 10:02 AM | Report abuse

incidentally, the Orioles fans are pretty much assured that Tex is going to Baltimore, rumor going around that he's going to be at the Ravens game today. doesn't necessarily mean he'll sign there, but that's what the Orioles fans are assuming.

Tex and Boras spend a good couple of weeks with the Lerners already hearing their pitch, I guess it is B'More's turn now.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 14, 2008 10:09 AM | Report abuse

FWIW, I believe that others besides Jaybee have stated their belief that the Lerners offer was not serious. I tend to believe that it was serious, and I hope that they are wrong about that. That said, they are entitled their opinions and are free to post them here or elsewhere, IMO.

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | December 14, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

I read the Loverro article, and there's only one question it leaves me with. Who is more out of touch, Tom Loverro or JayBeeeeee? Could be a tossup there. Maybe they're the same person.

Kasten is going nowhere, unless perhaps Selig retires and he gets tapped for the commissioner job. Loverro and JayBeee cite all these things that supposedly make Kasten out of the loop and unhappy here. First, they say that Kasten's frustrated because the Lerners won't open their checkbook. When the Lerners DO open the checkbook, they say Kasten's frustrated because they're dealing with Boras, who Kasten supposedly hates. So what? He hates him, but to do business he has to deal with him, so he does. It's called being a professional, guys. Just because you don't like people it can't stop you from dealing with them when you need to to improve the team. So, once the Nats consummate a deal with a Boras client and Kasten doesn't resign in protest, what will be the next red herring Loverro/JayBeeeeeeee raises to say that Kasten will be leaving?

Face it, guys, you're out of touch. If all these things supposedly bother Kasten enough to make him leave, why would he go to Toronto where he'd just have the same issues all over again? He's going nowhere. He's doing the job here, working with the Lerners and Bowden just as he has ever since he came here.

Posted by: nunof1 | December 14, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

My view is Kasten does not like the bid effort for Tex and that it is pushing up the price of Tex and the pay day for Boras because he know Nats have no intention of stay in the game until they win.

I found Tom L.'s view that Tex would require a opt out clause very early in the contract to sign with the Nats, not because he wanted a chance for a bigger pay day, but rather because of the danger that the Lerners will fail to follow through with promises to make the team competitive. Tex would help but they need many more players of top quality and fast to keep the promises needed to make Tex come here. Not really a big deal to me since my view is they have no intention of signing him but interesting non the less that Tom L. thinks this is a issue.

Kasten may well stay......but would any of you blame him for bolting for a new Club President Job. Is there a more troubled ownership/GM set up in baseball than the Lerners and Jimbo? I guess the PIT might be worse but at least they put a watchable product on the field. As Tom L. also confirms, that Nats have been the laughing stock of MLB for over two years now........One fake offer is not going to change in the long run so enjoy the improved standing while it lasts.

Posted by: JayBeee | December 14, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

Natsbisquit - I agree that Ronnie is a defensive liability at 2d due to his lack of range, but there's some good evidence that he more than makes up for it with his bat. Specifically, I've been looking at his "win shares" calculations on Hardball Times stat page and comparing him to other 2d basemen. His 12 win shares, given what could be expected with his playing time, puts him well within the top half of 2d basemen. I'll defer to Chris Needham or others who are better with stats than I, but this is at least one indication that he can contribute a lot in a smart platoon, where he plays mostly against lefties and is pulled for a defensive replacement ("Alberto Anderson") late in games if we grab a lead.

Willie, I just want to find a way to play him, I don't care where. A poor man's (A LAC's?) Tony Phillips / Chone Figgins in my dreams. He's not played much 2d base since 2005, and has less than 1000 Major League innings there in his career. It looks like his range was not great, but what I think cost him playing time was (A) low OPS, and (B) Tad Iguchi's rookie season. We have an indication the OPS problem might be solved the past 2 years.

If you think the past 2 years for Harris and Belliard offensively is for real, you have about an .800 OPS for Belliard and a .750 for SuperWillie. In a platoon, with Harris playing more, perhaps you get .770 out of that position? That would have ranked 9th in MLB for the position last year.

I have a bias towards offense in the regular season, shifting to defense towards the stretch and playoffs. More runs, more sizeable leads, fewer stressful innings, preserves arms. Don't know if that makes sense. Also, I like cheap platoons that perform better than more expensive regulars. Don't get me wrong - I would prefer O-Dog over this option. But I'd rather give a little of the glove at 2d base (not SS) that Alberto Anderson gives you in exchange for the bat SuperWillieBelli might offer.

Posted by: jca-CrystalCity | December 14, 2008 12:17 PM | Report abuse

By the way, some of Hardball Times fielding stats for Belli look off. They have him playing over 1000 innings at 2d, involved in over 500 plays, starting 24 double plays, but having less than 60 balls hit in his defensive zone (and 2 OOZ plays). That's why I did not mention his revised zone ratings (a range measure) from from Hardball times when talking about his defense.

Posted by: jca-CrystalCity | December 14, 2008 12:32 PM | Report abuse

I don't think the FO has been sitting on its hands the last couple of years. Do any of you remember what Ladson said about last season in the spring? He said if the Nationals could avoid the injury bug that has festered every year, they had the potential to be a 90+ win team. Well, that didn't happen as they were a mash unit last season. I truly believe that if they can catch lightning in a bottle and somehow avoid that injury bug this season that those predictions have a shot of coming true this year. Lets face it, the 27 yankees couldn't have won if the same scenario happened to them then. All that being said, I feel that the offer to Tex will have to outdo all the others in the end. Perhaps not by a whole lot, but it will have to be the top dog in order to lure him to DC. Keep the faith, think positive. Look how far the farm system has come in just the year and a half the Lerners have owned this team. The P Nats were champs last year, all the minor teams showed vast improvement. You can't have a mansion without a solid foundation. You don't build a house from the roof down do you? Give it a rest all you naysayers...it IS going to get better.

Posted by: cokedispatch | December 14, 2008 12:33 PM | Report abuse

natbisquit: regarding Belliard - Scooter's right, I don't think lackadaisical is a term you could use with him. Unconventional, yes, but not lackadaisical. Even when he plays 2B as a short RF, he's in position to make a play at the bag, more often than not.
Unless a better deal comes along, the team could do much worse than having Hernandez & Belliard ready to split time at 2nd.

Posted by: BinM | December 14, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

I have a few thing to add to defend myself:

First, mmmmm beer. All agree?

Second, like many of you, I have been a season ticket holder since '05, go to spring training every season, been to every home opener (including 05 season opener at philly), every final game of the season because I know I will miss the season as soon as it is over, and countless games inbetween. I, like most/all of you, go for the love of the game. NL, AL, AAA, A, or little league, I love this game. I go to see the players on the field and not the owners in the box. This is not Dallas.

Third, despite all my feelings toward the Learners, I still agree with "The Plan". This will be a good, maybe great, franchise in a few years. I did not want them to sign Crow with those demands, but he fell to the Nats because the teams in front of the Nats in the 2008 draft knew he would be hard to sign. Build with youth, but sign them too.

All of us are spending good money to see this team, but I do not feel I am getting anything in return. Tickets prices have gone up (not in 2009) but the wins and tallent have gone down. It was painful at times last season to watch this team. I do not want 2009 to be more of the same. Health alone will give us 10 more wins. Signing a few free agents will help too.

Fouth, I just want them to sign a good player, not a Red, we can support for years. Who is our Ripken, Jetter, Howard, Wright, or Ovechkin that we can support for years to come? Zimmerman is the "face of the franchise" but still not signed.

Finally, mmmmm beer.

Just two months until pitcher and catchers report to camp.

Posted by: Batboy05 | December 14, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

And a quick check with baseball reference's defensive stats shows that hardball times might have his 2007 stats at 2d mixed with his 2008. the 1004 innings is 2007, per BR.

Posted by: jca-CrystalCity | December 14, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Madison,

2,000 posts ago you defended the Lerners saying they are spending money because they paid money to buy the team and they put 30 million into the stadium improvements.

First of all, buying the team and putting money into the team are two different things. Its not like they were the only buyers and they paid that much money to bring a team to DC.

The 30 million in stadium improvements weren't from the goodness of their hearts to the fans, it was improvements to allow them to make more money. Like that Miller Light Bar behind the scoreboard.

Saying the fans need to buy tickets and t-shirts to give mult-millionaires more money to put into the team is insulting and ridiculous. You act like this is a charity. The Lerners aren't poor. The ticket sales and merchandise sales should reflect the product on the field, not the other way around.

Your suggestion of signing Jon Garland is stupid. He's terrible and a waste of money.

You do have good points, like not signing Willy Tavares. He can't hit and steals are overrated.

Posted by: BillyBeane | December 14, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

coked: The initial offer to Teixeira still offers a lot of flexibility, should Boras come back for a counter. An additional year (or two), opt-outs, vested/Club/Player extensions, etc.
If Teixeira is in one of the boxes (w/Boras) at the Steelers - Ravens game today, you can assume they're looking for a counter-offer. I'm somewhat suprised that BOS has not yet been heard from, but if they do post an offer, a counter-salvo from the NYY can't be far behind. All in all, it lends itself to a couple more suspenseful weeks under "Boras' Big Top".

Posted by: BinM | December 14, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Interesting season and stats analysis on the Nats in Fangraphs.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/season-in-review-washington-nationals/#comments
Salient points:
Yes they were the worst team in baseball, but it was a better team (roster) than 2007 in almost all respects.
While the starting pitching was perfectly mediocre last year, it was a significant improvement over 2007 mainly because every starter was mediocre and there were not many Bascik /Chico starts.
We really missed Nick and a healthy Dmitri.
Biggest fall off, no surprise, was in the set up relief. Biggest mystery MIA - Chris Schroder's disappearance. They point out just how good Rauch and Schroder were in that role in 2007.

Posted by: jca-CrystalCity | December 14, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

I read where Boston has offered 6 yrs at $150mm. we need to amend our offer. 8 yrs - $190mm. with yrs 1,2, and 3 at $30mm and opt out after yr three. no trade

Posted by: mjames0 | December 14, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

2,000 posts ago you defended the Lerners saying they are spending money because they paid money to buy the team and they put 30 million into the stadium improvements.
-----------------

BillyBeane - I think you have me confused with someone else.

I'll give wiggle room to be wrong about this, but I don't recall ever putting forth thus particular argument.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 14, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Umm Beer.....baseball.....I like that too

Posted by: JayBeee | December 14, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Saying the fans need to buy tickets and t-shirts to give mult-millionaires more money to put into the team
------

and I KNOW I never said anything close to this. because that is, in fact, a ridiculous notion.

and as for Garland, as I DID say earlier, I was just throwing names out at random, because I don't believe in giving big FA contracts to starting pitchers. I'd rather trade for or develop them. preferably the latter. giving big-money FA contracts to pitchers is russian roulette.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 14, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Has it been mentioned somewhere other than this blog that O. Hudson is a possibility for the Nats? Nobody else seems to see it...

Posted by: mike8 | December 14, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

http://masnsports.com/2008/12/denials-all-around.html: Mr. Angelos' Sports Network is denying that Tex will be at the game tonight, at least as a guest of Mr. Angelos.

Posted by: BGinVA | December 14, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

mjke8: I think there was a comment from Hudson back in mid-November that he'd be interested in hearing an offer from the Nationals.

Posted by: BinM | December 14, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

mjames0: "I read where Boston has offered 6 yrs at $150mm".
Please state your source.

Posted by: BinM | December 14, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

I also think the Plan is fine. They just are not following the plan. Building the farm is the right thing to do. Playing young hungry talent is fine. What I object too is Lopez, Pena, Lo Duca, Estrada, types getting on this team. I object to drafting Detwilier higher than his talent just because he would sign the next day....which he did for the most part. I object to drafting not doing the pre draft work to find out the Crow was an idiot and better choices were available. Then once failing to do the draft leg work, bail on signing crow. What I object too is finding your starting pitchers in the trash heap every February. What I object too is turning over the bull pen to likes of Charlie Manning because you had no other choices. What I object to is going into a season counting on Patterson and Hill and Johnson and D. Young.......that is inexcusable.

Posted by: JayBeee | December 14, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse

So JayBeee, what you find objectionable or offensive are what you percieve as mistakes or errors in judgement? Granted, there have been a few along the way (Pena & Estrada in particular), but if memory serves, the Lopez/Kearns for Majewski/Bray et al trade was praised by most of the people who cover the game as a "steal" for the Nationals at the time.
Every team makes errors in judgement, every year - the difference is, the other teams in MLB weren't re-building from ground zero over the past three years.

It's fair to rant when "your team" makes an error in judgement, or to rage over the lack of talent on the field in a given year - that is a fan's right. But to consistently spew bile at the orginization over a checklist of percieved wrongs is unfair, and harmful in the long run, IMO.

Posted by: BinM | December 14, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

BinM

Todays' New York Post - George A. King III alludes to it in his article on Manny and Tex.

Posted by: mjames0 | December 14, 2008 1:58 PM | Report abuse

>natbisquit mentions Belliard appearing lackadaisical. Whenever I see Ronnie Belliard on the field, I remember reading The Fielding Bible, which gave him high marks for making more plays than the average second baseman. Their comment: "He looks too much like Manny Ramirez for people to believe he's a good fielder."

He's not lackadaisical, he just enjoys himself too much. It just looks like he can't get back to being serious fast enough, but he usually can.

Posted by: Brue | December 14, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

mjames0 - Thanks. So that has the rumoured offers on the table as Orioles (7/140M, $20M AAV), Angels (7/150 up to 8/160, $20M AAV), Nationals (8/160, $20M AAV), and the Red Sox (6/150M, $25M AAV). IMO, Boras won't like the initial Sawx offer (too few years), and Teixiera might still have some lingering problems with them as well. I could see the Nationals going up to 8/170 ($21.25M AAV) or 9/195 ($21.67M AAV) on a counter-offer, but not higher.

Posted by: BinM | December 14, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Brue - see my comment from 12:35 today. Unconventional, yes, but not lackadaisical.

Posted by: BinM | December 14, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

I like Belliard. He wants to win and plays hard in his own way. He is not a clubhouse problem like Manny R.

Sure Kearns Lopez deal was viewed favorably back in 2006. I am talking about 2008 Lopez....it was clear after 2007 he was never going to help this team. Jimbo's ego would not allow him to cut him lose when he should have.

Those who want to make apologies for Lerners please at least know they have owned the team since mid 2006 and are responsible for two of the worst seasons of baseball ever.....not just losses....the total inability to compete. That is 2 1/2 years and counting.

Bad teams that make bad decisions fire their GM's.......That would be a step in the right direction.

Posted by: JayBeee | December 14, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

I am talking about 2008 Lopez....it was clear after 2007 he was never going to help this team. Jimbo's ego would not allow him to cut him lose when he should have.

Cut him loose for nothing? He knew, like everyone else that Lopez can hit .290-.300 in the bigs, and that he had value.

Posted by: Brue | December 14, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Uh oh...MLB.com says Yankees are definitely in...

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20081214&content_id=3716994&vkey=hotstove2008&fext=.jsp

Posted by: HenryStin | December 14, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

He had no value playing for the Nats and would not try as long as he was with the Nats. His lazy attitude hurt the team much more than some trade value that never happened.....What value are you speaking of? Did not time prove me right on Lopez at least.

Posted by: JayBeee | December 14, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, JayB, .385/.426/.538 over 156 at bats and $3.5 million from Arizona sides with Bowden that Lopez has value. In retrospect, I think we have to admit that JimBo was right to try as long as he could to trade Felipe and only cut him loose when it was the absolute last chance to benefit from it.

Posted by: Section506 | December 14, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

So, a little anecdote: my other favorite team just dropped to 7-7 after an especially poor performance against a team that is 2-11-1. So I stroll over to Redskins Insider to see what people are saying and Jasno has a poll up about who is most disappointing. The comments section is already huge and it is stuffed full of angry bile for 1) Dan Snyder, 2) Jim Zorn, 3) Jason La Confora, which is pretty much always the case anyway.

But in going through and reading all the comments, I was a little taken aback at how many are emotional and how little actual analysis is going on. My own belief is that the o-line and d-line are just too old, so I used Firefox feature and searched for it.

I came upon a well-reasoned and thoughtful analysis of the team's situation that didn't blame any "bad attitudes" or "undermining" but only looked at the capabilities of the players and drew a wonderfully rational conclusion.

By VT Nat's Fan.

Thanks this holiday season to all of you for your part in making this the best sports blog on the internet.

Posted by: Section506 | December 14, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Felipe was clearly dogging it when he was here, and that is what infuriates me about him.

regarding the Lerners -

Jaybee, I see where you are coming from here, and I understand, and you do have some valid points.

I just get the feeling that this is all so that you can say "I told you so" if nothing happens.

I don't believe in pre-emptively bashing the Lerners for something that hasn't happened yet, just so I can say "I told you so way back then".

If nothing happens and we go into the season no better than we were last year, then I will bash till I can't bash no more. But I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt for as long as I can before I turn sour.

Posted by: MrMadison | December 14, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

....What value are you speaking of?

His value to other teams. $3.5 million. Because he can hit.

Posted by: Brue | December 14, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

JayBeee: Oh, so we isolate Lopez ver.'08 as a problem. Was he a good ballplayer in '06-07? Most people would say yes. Did he fall off in '08 - again, almost everyone would say yes. Did he go through a series of marital problems, ending in separation from his family in '08 - again, yes; Can that have an effect on your work performance - you betcha!
Were those things controllable by the FO - no way!
Learn to separate player issues from mistakes made by the FO & you'll be much better off, and a more tolerable rad as well.

Posted by: BinM | December 14, 2008 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Not for the Nats and if the Dbacks play less than .500 you will see the same dogging it that we did......yes he has talent but not worth the trouble.....can you say cancer on a young team.....

Posted by: JayBeee | December 14, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

JayBeee: Try not to jump to conclusions on the individual - he sucked for WAS, but FLop managed to play well for StL over the last month of 2008, almost making the playoffs. See how he does over the 1st half in 2009 with AZ before putting a 'Clubhouse Cancer' stamp on him.

Posted by: BinM | December 14, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

General observation - It would be nice if the blogfathers at the WaPo could feed / water us (new news or rumours) daily, at least. Tracee, Dave, Chico, Cameron - is anybody out there?

Posted by: BinM | December 14, 2008 5:59 PM | Report abuse

BinM,

Your new around here right......go back to 2007 blog posts and you will see even SBF talking about Lopez as a Cancer and me and others pointing out countless plays in games that we all watched in person and on TV where he just did not give a S&^t.....This lack of hustle can be traced to his days as a Blue Jay.....check posts from 2006 in Cincy about how happy they were to get rid of him.....Dback will find out....or not maybe....but that is why they gave him a one year deal only.......1.5 Million less than we wasted on him so do your research before you spout......

Posted by: JayBeee | December 14, 2008 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Chico? good one BinM!

Posted by: JayBeee | December 14, 2008 6:09 PM | Report abuse

JayBeer: New to the blog, no - been around since 2005 in other "non-de-plume". I might agree with you that FLop tends to wear out his welcome early with teams, but it still dosen't make the 2006 trade a bad decision; It just makes the 2008 release an ultimately bad call.

Posted by: BinM | December 14, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

Yah, well he contributes here occaisionally (seemingly far less than you, MrMadison, 506 or many of the rest of us have lately).

Posted by: BinM | December 14, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

"Those who want to make apologies for Lerners please at least know they have owned the team since mid 2006 and are responsible for two of the worst seasons of baseball ever.....not just losses....the total inability to compete."

Odd. Pretty much any rational analysis of the 2007 season would probably call it an unqualified success. A team predicted before the season to lose over 120 games instead overachieved under a rookie manager to outperform the previous year's squad that featured Alfonso Soriano. Not sure what the Lerners could have done to improve on that, given the circumstances. Now the 2008 season was admittedly disappointing, but hardly one of the "worst seasons of baseball ever". Some team manages to lose 100 or so games pretty much every year. Often more than one. There are probably many reasons for the disappointing 2008 season, injuries of course being a huge one. In the wake of that, I see many positive steps being taken by ownership to fix things up, and clearly they're not done yet. They may have only just begun, actually. Still two more months before pitchers and catchers report, after all.

So based upon all the words spewed here by this JayBeeeee character the past few days, one would have to conclude that he's at best hopelessly out of touch or at worst just an unrepentant hater, wouldn't one?

Posted by: nunof1 | December 14, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Hello, all! I haven't been able to post because the post insisted on giving my full name, and that's no fun. Speaking of no fun, anyone get nostalgic for the Nats whilst watching the Redskins? They are so . . . evocative.

Posted by: flynnie1 | December 14, 2008 7:55 PM | Report abuse

Sweeten it!

Posted by: 6thandD | December 14, 2008 7:57 PM | Report abuse

Welcome back, Father Flynniegan!

Posted by: leetee1955 | December 14, 2008 8:39 PM | Report abuse

Thank, you, leetee, thank you - have we signed Manny yet like Buster Olney said we would

Posted by: flynnie1 | December 14, 2008 8:49 PM | Report abuse

Now I feel more optimistic with Fylnnie back.......on 2007 team.....Logan, Fick, Flop, The guy who let Bonds hit the HR and was proud of it......need I say more...Like I said it is not the losses it is the joke factor of that team....2008....never, ever competed....Injures happen, total capitulation never has to happen.....it did with the Nats in 2008.

Posted by: JayBeee | December 14, 2008 8:59 PM | Report abuse

Welcome back, flynnie! I did find the Redskins to be ... evocative, since you asked. :-D

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | December 14, 2008 9:04 PM | Report abuse

This may be old (non) news but, courtesy of the MASN site, by way of the mlbtraderumors.com:


Denials all around
By Roch Kubatko on December 14, 2008 11:47

An Orioles official insists that Mark Teixeira will not be attending today's Ravens game as a guest of owner Peter Angelos.

I'm told there's no physical scheduled for tomorrow - which I assumed all along. You need to have an agreement in place before taking that step. You don't make the guy turn and cough while going back and forth on contract terms. And the Orioles might not require that Teixeira take one anyway. Or he might have taken one earlier and has the results in hand. Or he'll do it if there's an actual agreement. But from what I've heard, he's not taking one tomorrow.

Teixeira might be at the game if he's still in town. Why wouldn't he? I'm sure he's a football fan and it's a great matchup. He might be shown on the big screen, though he's not easily recognized in a crowd. But according to the high-ranking official, he won't be eating crabcakes with Angelos. And this person would know.

I'll duck inside the MASN suite and check, but don't get your hopes up.

Has Angelos ever been at a Ravens' game? I don't see him being a face-painter. But hey, the two franchises are becoming quite chummy. It's a whole new world.

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | December 14, 2008 9:09 PM | Report abuse

Thank you 1A! The Nats defense is much better than the 'skins. They both lack pop. The weather, food, transportation and company are far better at the Nats games.

Posted by: flynnie1 | December 14, 2008 9:16 PM | Report abuse

My take on Felipe remains the same: he's not a self-motivator. He needs other people to inspire him to play to his potential or else he gets sloppy. It's not lazy, precisely, but it's wandering in need of a leader. In 2006 we had Soriano, in 2008 with the Cardinals he had Pujoles. Who was the leader of last year's team?

It was not Felipe Lopez. Which is, coincidentally, is also why we have no time for him on this team.

Posted by: Section506 | December 14, 2008 9:19 PM | Report abuse

Another MASN item re. the rumor (and ouch on the terrible towels):

Piling dirt on the rumor
By Roch Kubatko on December 14, 2008 5:19

Peter Angelos is not here today. He's at home - perhaps watching the Ravens-Steelers game, or a good Lifetime movie. That part I can't confirm. But I know for sure that he's not at M&T Bank Stadium.

Mark Teixeira isn't in the MASN suite and nobody has seen him on the club level. However, the food in the Big Steaks suite looked and smelled terrific. I was crashing parties like I was back in college.

Anyway, if Teixeira is here, he's not being accompanied by anyone with the Orioles unless he's friends with a clubhouse attendant.

Maybe he's bundled up with the masses.

I just hope he's not waving a Terrible Towel.

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | December 14, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse

With the 2008 version of the Skins dead and buried, more or less...we can now turn our full attention to spring. Puts a smile on my face....sounds of Viera. Now come on Tex, put ink to contract and join in the party on the gold coast of Florida. Join us at the Panera in Viera. We'll even let you buy lunch. : < {)

Posted by: cokedispatch | December 14, 2008 10:33 PM | Report abuse

Tex at M&T or not,

HERE WE GO STEELERS!, HERE WE GO!

Posted by: Section505203 | December 14, 2008 11:50 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company