Network News

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

Could Tom Glavine Make Sense?

There's a throwaway line at the end of this ESPN.com story about Tom Glavine that mentions the Nationals as a possible match for the future Hall of Famer.

For what it's worth: The Nationals, have not had any formal talks with Glavine's agent, Gregg Clifton. But Clifton said today that Glavine, 42, and Nats president Stan Kasten are close friends, "and I know Tom has a great deal of respect for Stan."

Perhaps that can be the starting point for some dialogue.

By most accounts, the Braves are still the most likely landing spot for Glavine, who went 2-4 (5.54 ERA) in a 2008 season derailed by elbow and shoulder problems.

By Chico Harlan  |  January 8, 2009; 6:01 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Brewers Like Cordero... er, Hoffman; Mets Like Redding (Update)
Next: Nats Draw Line With Dunn, Hudson

Comments

moving right along.....

Posted by: jfromPG | January 8, 2009 6:12 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the topic, Chico (the writer). I'll let the armchair GM types weigh in re. diamond-specific stuff, but I would think that there could also be mentoring possibilities. I recall reading at one point about a conversation between Chico (the pitcher) and Glavine in which he gave the young pitcher some thoughts and encouragement. That was back in 2007, I believe.

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | January 8, 2009 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Oh please... Harlan, this doesn't even smell like a rumour.

Posted by: BinM | January 8, 2009 6:27 PM | Report abuse

It is, however, a discussion topic, which had been suggested as a possibility for postings.

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | January 8, 2009 6:29 PM | Report abuse

Ladson says the Nats are done with big name free agents. Craaaaaaaaaap.
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/01/nationals-wont.html

Posted by: phishisgr8 | January 8, 2009 6:31 PM | Report abuse

Re-post from prior string

Back for a moment to Derek Lowe - Yes, sir, put me down for one of those on a 3-yr+, $42M/$47M offer sheet. Lowe would be a lovely addition to the Nationals - #1SP, highly reliable, great W/K ratio, Randy wouldn't need to 'screw around' with him, ...

2009 Rotation = Lowe(R), Olsen(L), Lannan(L), Cabrera(R), Hill(R) or Balestar(R). I can dream, can't I?

Posted by: BinM | January 8, 2009 6:03 PM
-----------------

Please spend the $$ & do something like this, than make a 'buddy' deal for Glavine on a 1-yr.

Posted by: BinM | January 8, 2009 6:32 PM | Report abuse

Ladson says the Nats are done with big name free agents. Craaaaaaaaaap.
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/01/nationals-wont.html

Posted by: phishisgr8 | January 8, 2009 6:31 PM

yep.

but oddly, I'm not as upset as I should be about this.

Posted by: MrMadison | January 8, 2009 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Ladson just noted that the Nats are out of the running for Dunn and Hudson, and that they never had contact with Lowe. So much for the suspense...

Posted by: jfromPG | January 8, 2009 6:36 PM | Report abuse

and and here comes Jaybeee to doom and gloom it up in 5...4..3...2....

Posted by: MrMadison | January 8, 2009 6:37 PM | Report abuse

Sorry for the Ladson note, when I posted it was showing any other comments.

Posted by: jfromPG | January 8, 2009 6:37 PM | Report abuse

1a1 - Sorry, but I want something tasty & reasonably substantial to discuss. Glavine to the Nats' is like, oh I don't know, a popcorn f--t?

Posted by: BinM | January 8, 2009 6:38 PM | Report abuse

I think what Ladson fails to report is that the talking price for some of these players' is being manipulated by "Boras' Big Top", with Lowe (directly via expectation) and Dunn (indirectly, via Manny). Hudson, well, that's another story.

The Nationals could jump back in at any point, it's just becoming more unlikely.

Posted by: BinM | January 8, 2009 6:48 PM | Report abuse

Well isn't this just the cat's @$$? Call this the Tampa Rays recipe for success. Stockpile a run of consecutive #1 overall picks, drive attendence down, alienate your fanbase, change your name, unis, manager and POOF... you got yerself a division title. Thank god for the Caps DC fans.

Posted by: RicketyCricket | January 8, 2009 6:52 PM | Report abuse

One way or the other, the Nationals FO needs to splurge & trade to acquire a SP anchor and a LH-power hitter for 2009 & beyond. Ideally, the 'splurge' (FA pick-up) would be for a 3-4 year contract maximum; the trade would surrender depth positions (OF's and/or CA or P prospects) for a position of need.

Posted by: BinM | January 8, 2009 6:58 PM | Report abuse

Looks like you will be paying for my first Beer this season in the Red Loft Mr. M.....Sorry you got fooled by this team....I used fall for this stuff too, but after 5 years I have learned better.

Posted by: JayBeee | January 8, 2009 6:59 PM | Report abuse

I was holding out hope that Glavine and Smoltz would both retire so that Maddux, Smoltz and Glavine would all go into the HOF together. Now Smoltz is going to the Red Sox so that's not going to happen.

I hear Lowe is also talking to the Braves (if we can believe that it isn't another Boras trick to drive up prices). It looks like we will face him either way.

Posted by: LurkerNowPoster | January 8, 2009 7:01 PM | Report abuse

Signing Glavine? Uh...no.

Posted by: leetee1955 | January 8, 2009 7:02 PM | Report abuse

i'll weigh my opinion on this, and I'll tell you what is keeping me optimistic.

but from the get-go, I'll make this very clear. I am in favor of adding a power bat to this team. I'm in favor of acquiring Dunn, or Manny, or whomever we need to get.

HOWEVER....

I don't think we have a 100-loss team this year.

this years team is NOT the "exact same as last years team", regardless of the Cheap Lerner bashing agenda getting in the way of common sense. we've removed the majority of the dead weight that was on our roster last season. the mackowiaks, lo ducas, lopezes, etc. they are all gone.

no lo duca, no lopez, no estrada, no vindication redding, no perez, no colome, no boone, no mackowiak, no ray king..and the list goes on....

this team as it stands right now, is BETTER than the team we had last year.

all that's left is Kearns, Pena, and Young.

Young is out of shape and likely won't play.

Pena won't even make the roster with our outfield as it stands right now. and if he does make the roster without playing like A-Rod in mid-season form, then Bowden and Acta should be fired immediately.

Kearns will likely be the 4th outfielder at best.

what we have now, is a team full of young, unproven players with talent and great upside. our lineup is young. our pitching staff is going to be young. our bench is going to be relatively young.

YES, Johnson is going to get hurt, and yes we won't have a 1B to fill in for him. but in *my* opinion, that is really the only hole in our position play. every where else we've got stable competence and/or immense potential.

no, we don't have the sexy "name" to put butts in the seats. and that's a disappointment.

but throwing this whole season away just because we didn't sign Adam Dunn is colossally stupid and is simply throwing a temper tantrum because you didn't get your way.

yes Dunn would have helped and he would have improved the team. but baseball-wise, not signing him is not a disaster. there will be a definite PR hit, for sure. we'll just have to deal with that.

however, we are not at all in as bad a shape *right now* as everyone thinks we are.

this could change, if Bowden decides to invite a bunch of mackowiaks to the roster, but I am hopeful that he won't do that and will simply let the kids play.

Posted by: MrMadison | January 8, 2009 7:07 PM | Report abuse

The only response I can think of to Ladson's report that doesn't involve a string of vile profanity is "this had better be a negotiating stance."

Posted by: AtomicOvermind | January 8, 2009 7:09 PM | Report abuse

Maybe the Lerner's & "the Danny" should swap teams for 3 years - That could be interesting!

Posted by: BinM | January 8, 2009 7:11 PM | Report abuse

Maybe the Lerner's & "the Danny" should swap teams for 3 years - That could be interesting!

Posted by: BinM | January 8, 2009 7:11 PM

the Skins would make great draft picks, while the Nats would have Bonds, Sosa, Glavine, and any other past-his-prime "super star" over the age of 38 signed to HUGE multi-year deals.

JayBeee and the Cheap Lerner brigade would be happy, but the organization would be terrible.

Posted by: MrMadison | January 8, 2009 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Add in this....

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090108&content_id=3737381&vkey=news_was&fext=.jsp&c_id=was&partnerId=rss_was

And it's pretty much a perfect, perfect day.

MrM: If we take many more PR hits, the team is going to get chased out of town with torches and picthforks.

Posted by: AtomicOvermind | January 8, 2009 7:17 PM | Report abuse

It has less to do with getting Dunn and more to do with a morale crushing pattern this FO is establishing. Heading into this offseason everyone knew they needed to acquire a power left handed bat. They took a run a Tex - one that everyone knew they'd come up short in. When they didn't get him they retightened the purse strings and fell back on the same old party line of development through the draft and trades. That's all well and good but they simply haven't shown the willingness to pay any upper tier player - outside the offer to Tex - anything close to what's necessary to sign them.

Regardless of who is or isn't healthy this year as compared to last year, they haven't significantly improved their chances to score runs. In addition, they lost some veteran experience in the rotation. This all sounds way too familiar. I want to be proven wrong believe me but news like this is gut wrentching.

Tell me how more of the same old rhetoric is going to boost attendance next season or gain you respect in the industry? How are you going to drum up excitement over a team that didn't make a splash or any dramatic improvements over a team that lost 102 games a year ago?

It just makes me sick. I want so much to be excited about this team and I will get there by Opening day. By then I'll have had my fill on the kool-aid and I'll set myself up to be dissapointed all over again. Perhaps the plan works in the long run, but the seasons before that time comes count just as much.

Posted by: RicketyCricket | January 8, 2009 7:25 PM | Report abuse

MrM - Agreed; The team record should be better in 2009 with the team 'as is'. The Nationals should get a 10-game 'bounce' in their W-L off injuries alone, unless the unthinkable happens across the board again.

Also agreed; If they can't move him, Johnson is likely to go down with another injury. But there are plausible candidates currently available in the system - they're just not LH hitters.

As someone suggested earlier, maybe this team is 'Tampa Bay - redux', and it will be a ten-year path out of the wilderness. I hope not.

Posted by: BinM | January 8, 2009 7:25 PM | Report abuse

@Atomic - Oops, $62M more in cost dropped in the laps of the Lerner's. That might explain the overall feeling that they've 'pulled back' from the current FA market - that would roughly equate to Lowe & Hudson, or Dunn & Hudson as FA acquisitions.

Crappy news overall... Let's hope for a trade or two (without selling out the future).

Posted by: BinM | January 8, 2009 7:36 PM | Report abuse

so our prospective 100-loss, morale-crushing roster as it stands right now if we don't make any more changes at all:

C Flores (23)
1B Johnson (29)
2B Hernandez (25)
3B Zimmerman (24)
SS Guzman (30)
LF Willingham (30)
CF Milledge (23)
RF Dukes (24)

IF Belliard (33)
IF Casto (26)
C Nieves (30)
OF Harris (30)
OF Kearns (28)

SP Lannan (23)
SP Olsen (25)
SP Balester (22)
SP Open
SP Open

SP Contenders : Cabrera (28), Martis (21), Hill (27), Zimmermann (22), Chacin (27), Martin (25)

RP Mock (25)
RP Shell (25)
RP Hinckley (26)
RP Open
RP Open
SU Rivera (30)
CL Hanrahan (26)

RP Contenders: Estrada (24), Young (22), Chico (25), Martin (25), Ledezma (27)

just for a view of just how young this team is after shedding all that dead weight.

Posted by: MrMadison | January 8, 2009 7:37 PM | Report abuse

Lest anyone think we get too vitriolic over here...just check out the commentors over on the news story on MLB about the Nationals not signing any free agents. I could cook my dinner on the heat being generated.

Posted by: AtomicOvermind | January 8, 2009 7:52 PM | Report abuse

MrM: Yup, in fact Belliard is currently the oldest player on the roster (will turn 34 in April), followed by Nieves & Rivera (both turned 31 in 2008). This team is by-an-large a bunch of puppies, looking for an older dog to 'show them the ropes' on the field & on the mound.

That's a big part of why I've been pushing for a player like Derek Lowe since November - for his experience & ability to talk to the other pitchers about winning with less than their best stuff (Bergmann, anyone?).

Winning came easily to most of these guys when they were younger, because they were better athletically. When they rise to the ML-level, pure talent sometimes isn't enough.

Posted by: BinM | January 8, 2009 7:57 PM | Report abuse

And the difference from that lineup and the one that finished the season is Willingham (back issues) and Johnson (until he gets hurt again).

I don't mourn the loss of Perez and Redding. I want to see how the young pitchers do.

This isn't the same roster that started last season that's for sure... but it is pretty darn close to the one that finished it.

I want to be wrong... I hope your optimism proves prophetic. I just don't feel it.

Posted by: RicketyCricket | January 8, 2009 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Lest anyone think we get too vitriolic over here...just check out the commentors over on the news story on MLB about the Nationals not signing any free agents. I could cook my dinner on the heat being generated.

Posted by: AtomicOvermind | January 8, 2009 7:52 PM

MLB.com is the home of Mouthbreathers.

I don't lend any credence to anything they say.

Posted by: MrMadison | January 8, 2009 7:59 PM | Report abuse

...and the death spiral continues...

Posted by: CoverageisLacking | January 8, 2009 8:09 PM | Report abuse

With the lineup we have, we would need clearly superior pitching in order to be competitive. There doesn't seem to be any real progress when it comes to improving the pitching staff in a discernable way. They got some pretty good efforts from the starters last year, but when you have to be perfect, eventually you start throwing too many pitches, leave games too early, kill the bullpen in the second half of the season, and generally wear your entire staff out. Yeah, some of the guys got a year's experience last year, which is ok, but nobody knows if any of those guys are the genuine article - Mock, Balester, Bergmann, etc. See, just because you HAVE big league experience doesn't mean that you actually deserve it. Even Lannan tiptoes around the strike zone, and barely hits 90 on his fastball. Cabrera can't even find it. Martis is still trying to miss the bat. Zimmerman moved up three levels - he'll get exposed, and whether he rebounds the second half or not, he'll get abused in the first half of his first season. The team's in big trouble in its current configuration right now, imo. Sad as hell man. I waited 33 years for this garbage.

Posted by: Brue | January 8, 2009 8:09 PM | Report abuse

Only 44 days (02/14/09) until CA/P report to Viera. C'mon Stan & JimBow - Drive the economy & get this team what it lacks!

Posted by: BinM | January 8, 2009 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Only 44 days (02/14/09) until CA/P report to Viera. C'mon Stan & JimBow - Drive the economy & get this team what it lacks!

Posted by: BinM | January 8, 2009 8:15 PM
-------------

Duh, try 37 (I'm not looking at a calendar).

Posted by: BinM | January 8, 2009 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Atomic, BinM...

The $62M overage for the stadium is on the DC Government, not the Nats ownership. The Nats will [continue to] pay their negotiated lease costs - the City pays for the stadium.

The AP article doesn't really explain that well, but those are the facts - the Lerners won't owe one dime more.

Posted by: TheBorg | January 8, 2009 10:07 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company