Network News

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

And With the 10th Overall Pick, the Nationals Select...

.... Stanford University right-hander Drew Storen, widely viewed as the top relief pitcher in the draft.

A rare sophomore-eligible draftee, Storen went 7-1 with seven saves this year for the Cardinal, with a Strasburgian strikeout-to-walk ratio of 66-to-8. In an interview with Baseball Analysts last week, he said most of the teams he had spoken to before the draft were interested in converting him to a starter. That will be a key question put to Nationals acting GM Mike Rizzo when he meets with the media in a few moments.

Storen's advisor? Brodie Van Wagenen, whom careful NJ readers will recognize as the agent for Nationals third baseman Ryan Zimmerman,

By Dave Sheinin  |  June 9, 2009; 6:41 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: With the First Pick of the 2009 MLB Draft...
Next: Rizzo On Strasburg, Storen... and Crow

Comments

Looks like we got our closer for the end of the season.

Posted by: grandstander | June 9, 2009 7:01 PM | Report abuse

Rizzo...tell me this isnt an overdraft with most of the top high school pitchers or Alex White still on the board.

Boo.

Posted by: LosDoceOcho | June 9, 2009 7:01 PM | Report abuse

This is disappointing. Boo.

Posted by: CoverageisLacking | June 9, 2009 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Disgraceful.

Posted by: SlowPitch63 | June 9, 2009 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Ah, the pandering pick.

Posted by: Section506 | June 9, 2009 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Nope. Don't like it. Get a closer through FA or trade in the off-season. Don't blow a first rounder on it.

Posted by: SaveOurTeam | June 9, 2009 7:04 PM | Report abuse

A reliever who can throw strikes? That is something I am more than happy to get with this pick.

Posted by: kevinx | June 9, 2009 7:04 PM | Report abuse

Crow is still on the board. Somehow, I don't really feel too sorry for him.

Posted by: derwink | June 9, 2009 7:05 PM | Report abuse

Well -- the Nats need relievers now. The interesting tidbit is that Crow can expect to eat crow. He sat out a year and will slip down the slotting system. He'll sign for less than the Nats offered a year ago.

Posted by: fischy | June 9, 2009 7:05 PM | Report abuse

With Alex White still available?

Kasten is right, this team will get the attendance it deserves.

Idiots!

At least having White provided more leverage for Boras to get a deal done with SS.

Storen = not impressed.

The FO of this team continues to disappoint.

Posted by: DesertNat | June 9, 2009 7:06 PM | Report abuse

For the less enlightened among us, this is bad because he is a reliever as opposed to a starter? Wasn't Cordero also a reliever in college before the Expos drafted him? (I know, but I liked him.)

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | June 9, 2009 7:07 PM | Report abuse

glad to see the owners stick together to teach holdouts and their agents a lesson! i mean, um, nevermind...

Posted by: longterm | June 9, 2009 7:08 PM | Report abuse

Yeah pretty pissed we didn't draft Alex White. Oh well...

Posted by: 1stpick | June 9, 2009 7:08 PM | Report abuse

They said they were going to take the best player on their board - I believe them. And they didn't take someone that's going to come cheaper - as a Nats fan, I like that. Now sign him up and let's hope for a positive rest of the draft.

Posted by: Kev29 | June 9, 2009 7:08 PM | Report abuse

Crow to the Royals.

Posted by: BGinVA | June 9, 2009 7:09 PM | Report abuse

And now Crow's off the board...spoke too soon.

I don't think there's anything wrong with getting a reliever.

Posted by: derwink | June 9, 2009 7:09 PM | Report abuse

This Baseball America site calls Storen a "money saver." (See the discussion under the Braves.) I wonder if the pros consider Storen the Best Player Available, or a guy who can save you a few hundred thousand?

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/draft/mock-draft/2009/268312.html

Posted by: EdDC | June 9, 2009 7:09 PM | Report abuse

We'll all eat crow (happily) if Storen works out as a long term, effective closer for us.

But my trick knee's tellin' me we're going to be looking back on this asking ourselves why, why, why...

In this sort of year did we really expect anything to be done right??

Posted by: SaveOurTeam | June 9, 2009 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Anyone out there happy? Can we talk some of these guys off the ledge?

Posted by: paulkp | June 9, 2009 7:11 PM | Report abuse

KC won't give Crow more than Nats offered last year.


Storen is a great pick. Anybody that feels it isn't has probably NEVER put a team together at any level.

Posted by: kgwcoach | June 9, 2009 7:11 PM | Report abuse

A lot of folks were talking about Grant Green being a desired pick because he could be up and helping soon. Well, that's what the Nats got in Storen. He will likely be up relatively soon after he signes, simply because the Nats need bullpen help so desperately. I like it. I don't think they made the pick because it was going to save money. I don't know that for sure, but it just seems like, while it doesn't happen often, this was a pick for need.

Posted by: Cavalier83 | June 9, 2009 7:12 PM | Report abuse

I hate the Storen pick. I don't mind if they went for "signability" but we don't need to draft relievers yet. Relievers are inconsistent and they are generally cheap to buy. We need to fill other needs first, worry about relievers when there is a lead to hold. Select a starter, it's much easier to convert a starter to a reliever than the other way around.

Posted by: cheeseburger53 | June 9, 2009 7:12 PM | Report abuse

The Storen pick is bad because there were 3 or 4 high school pitchers, Crow, Alex White and maybe even Tanner Scheppers still on the board. All are viewed as better pitchers by almost every publication I have read and all are rumored to have wanted more money to sign than Storen. Surely, the Nationals company line will be Storen was the top guy on our board. He may have been. Still sucks when my expectations set by the Nationals were far greater.

Posted by: LosDoceOcho | June 9, 2009 7:12 PM | Report abuse

That must have been some board that Rizzo concocted in order to get Storen ranked ahead of White, Scheppers, and Matzek, among others. Because, ya know, once the draft starts, you've got to "honor the board." What a joke.

Posted by: CoverageisLacking | June 9, 2009 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Goes nicely with our other guy at Stanford.

Posted by: PattyinSJ | June 9, 2009 7:14 PM | Report abuse

The truth is, none of us know if it's a good pick or not.

For all we know (and history agrees with me), Strasburg might be a bust while this kid could be a great closer.

I'm not ready to yell just yet. Maybe we should let the pick percolate a bit ...

Posted by: rushfari | June 9, 2009 7:14 PM | Report abuse

You guys are funny.

What percentage of first-round picks ever see the bright lights of major league ball? You act like you can predict this Storen guy won't be any good, while some other guy you've never seen play -- Alex White, or whomever -- is a sure star.

If Storen spends 10 years in the bigs, he will have been a fantastic pick, even if he never wins Cy Young.

Posted by: fischy | June 9, 2009 7:15 PM | Report abuse

Well, we could also be looking back on Strasburg as Ben McDonald Jr. when Ackley is the next Grady Sizemore. It's a crap shoot - I just hope the FO takes care of signing them and then we'll see what happens

Posted by: Kev29 | June 9, 2009 7:15 PM | Report abuse

"The Storen pick is bad because there were 3 or 4 high school pitchers, Crow, Alex White and maybe even Tanner Scheppers still on the board."

Note the word "high school". Colten Willems.

They need help now. College opponents are almost equivalent to AA, in some cases low AAA. High School hitters? Its a good pick for a team that desperately needs help now.

Posted by: periculum | June 9, 2009 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Most mocks I saw had Storen going a few slots later - big deal. He has great stuff and he still might be a starter - who knows. Also, they probably HAD to factor signability in a little simply because if they don't sign #10 they get no comp.

I'm not upset with this one, but let's see if the draft guys wanting above slot money later for value - that will be the key...

Posted by: goexpos2 | June 9, 2009 7:17 PM | Report abuse

That would be Tanner Scheppers of the St. Paul Saints, n'est-ce pas?

-----

The Storen pick is bad because there were 3 or 4 high school pitchers, Crow, Alex White and maybe even Tanner Scheppers still on the board.

Posted by: JohninMpls | June 9, 2009 7:20 PM | Report abuse

Dear goodness, Rizzo just cited "makeup" and "outstanding pitching tradition" as reasons for signing Storen.

Keep him as a reliever - quick to the big leagues.

For all of you calling it a crapshoot, you're right, it is - so you have to look at relative value. Hard to see how Alex White isn't everything Storen is and more.

Posted by: Highway295Revisited | June 9, 2009 7:21 PM | Report abuse

Here's the pick right after the Nats' pick, as described by Baseball America. It will be interesting to see how Storen, Crow and Matzek progress in the years ahead. Matzek might want too much money for the Nats to consider, after drafting Strasburg. Baseball is a business after all, especially with the Nats.

"The Rockies take Tyler Matzek, the lefthander out of Capo Valley High in Califorina, and no one thought that was happening. Matzek was No. 2 on some boards, and the Rockies will not be signing him quickly or easily. The word was out that he wants "precedent setting money" and that would be more than $7 million."

"Matzek was special down the stretch in the California sectional playoffs, hitting as high as 97 or 98 mph late in the season. He definitely had the highest ceiling left on the board; I’d be excited if I were a Rockies fan."

Posted by: EdDC | June 9, 2009 7:22 PM | Report abuse

Rizzo says they are going to keep Storen as a closer. Wow. Well, at least we know now that the Plan is officially dead.

Posted by: CoverageisLacking | June 9, 2009 7:22 PM | Report abuse

Thank you rushfari, goexpo

You make a lot of sense on a very hysterical board.

Posted by: soundbloke | June 9, 2009 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Would have loved it if Nats picked Crow to make him sweat over being a bone head last year.

Posted by: Enrico1 | June 9, 2009 7:26 PM | Report abuse

So, the Nationals were supposed to consider Aaron Crow again instead of taking Storen?

You can't be serious.

The Nationals #1 priority is signing Strasburg and the last thing the club needed was to draft a guy at #10 that was going to do what Crow did last year and throw the first year of his career away to play independent baseball.

Storen has two plus pitches and projects to fill perhaps the greatest need on the major league club in 2009.

How can anyone really complain about that?

The Nationals already have a stable of 21-22 year old pitchers who are starting to emerge in the organization.

You add Strasburg to that group and then strengthen the bullpen with your second selection.

My only issue would have been if there had been a top center fielder or big bat at first base that was available.

But it was an off year for position player talent in Round 1.

Posted by: leopard09 | June 9, 2009 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Great pick-- maybe an underdraft at this spot, but with the money we need for Stras, we would not be able to afford other pitchers at this spot. Love that we skipped over Crow. Again, this year's draft is much better than last year and it goes to show that Crows's contract expectations were unreasonable given his talent level.

Posted by: Tom8 | June 9, 2009 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Look, all you dyed in the wool, I love the team and therefore support all the decisions folks - it's not that Storen is a terrible pick. He's not. I just don't understand it when you go out publicly and make a huge deal out of "signability" not being an issue, and then pick a guy who's signability is one of his major assets, and leave another (almost universally regarded as better) guy on the board, with all the same attributes, who reportedly has a higher bonus.

I mean, the thing is, don't lie to me - it's a reasonable position and acceptable argument to say that we need to think about the budget at 9A, but when you say things like "we're not considering signability at all," it's like they think we're all dumb.

As the commenter over at NFA said, they make it very hard to love them.

Posted by: Highway295Revisited | June 9, 2009 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Not trying to be contrary but just trying to understand - aren't high school pitchers riskier, being younger and less developed?

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | June 9, 2009 7:28 PM | Report abuse

Because highway, you don't piss off a player and his agent by announcing to the whole world that you only picked him because he's cheap. They both know it but there are some things you just don't say!

Posted by: soundbloke | June 9, 2009 7:29 PM | Report abuse

Oh Good Lord, seeee youuuu laaater...

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | June 9, 2009 7:30 PM | Report abuse

Nevermind comparing to others on the board. The question is whether it would have been better to have Crow last year and a few less. pennies or Storen now.

Posted by: GoNatsTerps | June 9, 2009 7:31 PM | Report abuse

I don't know ... a reliever with control who can fire 95 mph strikes ... what would we do with him?

(this year ...)

(... next week)


(... tonight)

Posted by: natbiscuits | June 9, 2009 7:32 PM | Report abuse

I've seen Alex White play quite a few times, we follow college baseball religiously down here in Baton Rouge. White can play, but yes the MLB draft is probably the biggest gamble in all of sports. Oh well, I'm not pissed about the Storen pick. He fills a need on this team.

Posted by: 1stpick | June 9, 2009 7:32 PM | Report abuse

>I mean, the thing is, don't lie to me - it's a reasonable position and acceptable argument to say that we need to think about the budget at 9A, but when you say things like "we're not considering signability at all," it's like they think we're all dumb.

As the commenter over at NFA said, they make it very hard to love them.

Rizzo looks like the consummate yes man. Which might be even more annoying than the fact that everything they do is driven by money, or saving money. Just wait until you hear all the moaning from Kasten during negotiations for Strasburg. He's already playing the 'especially in this economy' routine as a negotiating ploy. It might be a recession for most of the country, but it's not a recession for the Washington Nationals. But then again, we're stoopid and we don't know that.

Posted by: Brue | June 9, 2009 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Can't put my hands on it right now, but Bill James did a study 15-20 years ago that showed that college players as a group, are much better selections than high school.

Posted by: gilbertbp | June 9, 2009 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Exactly soundbloke, but when discussing the draft days earlier, they could have signaled that they were going to go in that direction - Rizzo's basically been lying every time he's talked to the beat guys all week, or he's not nearly the evaluator of talent that he's rumored to be.

I mean, maybe I'm wrong and Storen turns out to be better than White, but looking at it, it doesn't look like that right now. White's potentially Strasburg-lite - he's a power arm who could be a front-of-the-rotation starter. Picking a reliever #10 overall is drafting for need, and drafting for signability - hard to see how that's best player available - and Rizzo never said "he was the guy highest on our board," just now.

Posted by: Highway295Revisited | June 9, 2009 7:37 PM | Report abuse

Doesn't Storen have two plus pitches, a fastball and a slider? Doesn't he love closing? Don't the Nats desperately need a closer?

Yes to all three questions. So why are people down on this pick?

Posted by: ericp331 | June 9, 2009 7:38 PM | Report abuse

Here's the thing...There appear to be two factions on here in respect to the draft:

1. Everything the Lerners and Nats do is based on money, and nothing anybody says to the contrary is correct, no matter what.

2. Everything the Lerners and Nats do is good, and nothing the other side says is going to matter.

I think it is somewhere in between: Yes, he is more signable that maybe Alex White. However, we can't know for certain that signability was a concern. Perhaps due to what they were looking for, a college starter was less attractive to them than a college closer. We've already seen what happens to starters who convert to closers in this organization. Bringing in a kid who already has the temperment may be better than trying to convert a guy.

And, for those of you who say that closers come cheap...check out the contracts this year. Not so cheap.

On the other hand, maybe they are just cheap.

Posted by: Cavalier83 | June 9, 2009 7:40 PM | Report abuse

1a1, sorry if I drove you off - I'm not really as ticked as my posts sound. But I get a little frustrated when the organization seems to be pursuing the same PR strategy of "if we keep saying it, then it's true, even if it's demonstrably false."

I mean, that's the strategy of Nats journal commenters, not a professionally-run organization.

Posted by: Highway295Revisited | June 9, 2009 7:42 PM | Report abuse

I hate being lied to! There is no way that pick was the best player on the board. We all know what we have here in the Learner ownership so PLEASE just tell the truth.

Posted by: JayBeee | June 9, 2009 7:46 PM | Report abuse

Like any of you morons know who is going to excel and who is going to be a bust. Judge the draft in a few years.

Posted by: edr04 | June 9, 2009 7:48 PM | Report abuse

On paper it's a great idea but practically? I wonder. Closer is a high pressure role. He's a sophomore. Usually you have more success with someone who you know has faced the fire and has proven he can meet the challenge. That's why I say it's better to do that through FA or trade.

Nothing is ever certain... everything has risk... but this risk might just be too much...

Posted by: SaveOurTeam | June 9, 2009 7:52 PM | Report abuse

I don't know much about this No, 10 draft choice, but I will go with the baseball minds. We need pitching - we need relief pitching. Chad Cordero was a relief pitcher when he was a No. 1 a few years ago. I'm thinking also of Casey Weathers, a relief pitcher out of Vanderbilt who was a No. 1 pick by the Colorado Rockies in the 2007 draft - same school, same year as David Price, by the way. Casey did pitch some with the Asheville Tourists, Class A, Sally League- my city and team -did well and was on the Rockies' fast track in "08. Had Tommy John surgery and is out this year, but I believe will come back better than ever. There are other successes and other failures by No. 1's, but I believe the Nats first two picks (if we can sign Strassburg) are good ones. We have others and we have a lot of holes to fill in the coming years, but we have a few that are almost major league ready, or trying to be. A good draft class will augment that, but the draft is a crap shoot with no real guarantees. I would have loved to have gotten that Tar Heel who went No, 1 to Seattle. But one can't have everything, can one?

Posted by: sfr123 | June 9, 2009 7:55 PM | Report abuse

Other than Strasbourg, I never heard of any of these kids, but drafting pitchers first makes sense to me. Even though history has been cruel to first round draft pitchers, hitters with aluminum bats, unless there is a Ryan Zimmerman out there have to be questionable. First the ex-Expos need to cleanse themselves of the damaged goods Bowden foisted upon them. Find a real centerfielder and a catcher who can take the abuse on the body.

Posted by: shemtof | June 9, 2009 7:56 PM | Report abuse

the thing that all of the naysayers are missing is that for this pick signability is a must; if they cant sign the kid they get no compensation. And I think the Nats stand on crow was justified by the fact he was picked lower this year than last and will get less than the Nats were willing to pay.

Taking a HS guy with this pick was an extra risk because the leverage that player has to go to college unless demands are met. No way should the Nats be spending major bonus money on SS and also some HS kid.

Nor was reselecting Crow an option as MLB rules says the draftee has to consent to be re-picked and Crow declined.

BTW the book on Rizzo is he prefers college pitchers. And the Detwiler and Zimmerman picks have turned out OK haven't they?

Posted by: wjskinner1 | June 9, 2009 8:13 PM | Report abuse

I'm not keen on drafting high schoolers especially pitchers. So perhaps in that case Storen was the best pick. It's hard to argue about signability when we don't know the overall financial context. Generally we look at the current payroll ranked near the bottom and figure there's LOTS of room to add quality players. That's certainly true. If we assume the Lerners get it now and are willing to spend some dough that's great but they aren't going to turn into Steinbrenners either.

I don't mind if they DO pick based on signability if it's part of an over all plan to spend properly but wisely on everything we need.

But I would be interested to know if when the 10 pick rolled around if Storen was that name at the top of the board. If I had some faith in this FO I'd relax... but...

Posted by: SaveOurTeam | June 9, 2009 8:17 PM | Report abuse

Folks -- just b/c they say Storen is "signable" doesn't mean Storen was not the best available player at the spot in the experts' view. The Nats said that they would take the best player available - the fact that the guys is signable does not automatically mean he wasn't the best pick. They're not mutually exclusive concepts. If he was the best pick AND is signable, this is a win win...

Posted by: cdstej | June 9, 2009 8:35 PM | Report abuse

SOT: I think you are missing the point. Signability was the number 1 factor at 10 becuase its a comp pick for not signing Crow. fail to sign that pick and its gone no comp pick in '10. So with all things being relatively equal you take the safer pick it 10. Its really a no brainer. None of the other prospects mentioned by our resident draft gurus (White, Matzen, Crow, Scheppers) were that much better than Storen - note that plenty of other teams also passed on all of these guys hell Scheppers hasn't even been picked as I am typing this.)

And a lot of scouts think Storen has the stuff to start. Its a solid pick, especially paired with Strasburg.

Posted by: wjskinner1 | June 9, 2009 8:40 PM | Report abuse

@wjskinner1

That's a factor yes but again it all comes back to the overall plan. They obviously have an idea of max spend for Strasbourg and max spend for #10. They should also have an idea for off season spend to upgrade some positions with potentially some savings for deadwood they shed.

BUT the point is IF signability is the #1 factor then why say it's not? That leads you to doubt the FO and so doubt their decision making capabilities. Rizzo is a good scout, a good evauluator no question. But since he's been GMing his judgement has been clouded and he's forced himself to step away from it a bit and let other guys have a voice...

Bottom line... we don't really know why they picked him (no matter what they say). If he works out it might be for luck rather than good selection...

Posted by: SaveOurTeam | June 9, 2009 8:58 PM | Report abuse

I love you people, but seriously, do any of you have enough knowledge to knock (or praise) the Storen pick?

Posted by: baltova1 | June 9, 2009 8:58 PM | Report abuse

It is clear that the Nats chose the Best Player Available who will sign for slot.

Posted by: EdDC | June 9, 2009 9:05 PM | Report abuse

You know I'm a little disappointed too, but my disappointment is in the people here who are attacking the Storen pick with such vigor and maintaining that they have been lied to. Poppycock!

If you compare the actual first round picks with the experts projections you can see vast differences in team and media valuations. Not just the Nationals. Picking on Kieth Law here are some of the deltas (actual/Law/difference):

Matzek 11/3/8
Scheppers 44/3/41 (yes Law off by 41 picks)
Crow 12/5/7
Miller 19/6/13
Paxton 37/9/26
White 15/10/5
Davidson 35/14/21
Stassi (still not picked)/15/at least 35 off

My point, this talk of being lied to is way off base. There is no reason to believe this pick was motivated by anything other than the team's actual valuation of the player. How do you value a player? Talent, Readiness, Coachability, Cost, health, ability to improve. Rizzo has a pretty good record on all those fronts. What's wrong with that?


Posted by: natbiscuits | June 9, 2009 10:02 PM | Report abuse

Don't you have to be ahead in the 8th. or 9th. inning to close a game? At that rate we'll see Storen 2 or 3 times a month.

Posted by: pstotts15 | June 9, 2009 10:17 PM | Report abuse

That Nats HAD to draft a signable player. If they cannot sign Storen then they will have to forfeit their first round pick in the 2011 draft, which looks like it will be Bryce Harper who looks to be an even better prospect than strasburg.

We drafted Storen because we had to it is as simple as that.

Posted by: peteywheatstraw | June 9, 2009 11:05 PM | Report abuse

petey - if Nats can't sign Storen, the pick they lose is the 2010 compensation for Storen's spot (10th), not the #1 overall pick.

And, btw, folks, exactly why do so many think the Nats owe us a precise explanation of their draft strategy? Aren't most strategies best if left undisclosed, even after the fact?

Posted by: hats4bats | June 9, 2009 11:20 PM | Report abuse

this what Chico's article said this morning:

"Because No. 10 is a compensatory pick, the Nationals will not receive a 2011 first-rounder if they cannot come to terms with this selection."

Maybe you are right but either way Chico needs to be clearer next time.

Posted by: peteywheatstraw | June 10, 2009 12:25 AM | Report abuse

Do a little research on Storen. He pitched in the college world series last year as a freshman and won. He was on ALL PAC TEN Team two years in a row and his era would have been below 1 except for one inning early in the year when Stanford just blew a game. His strike out to walks is as good as Strasburg. He has grown up around the game because his dad was most recently with XM Radio for the past 5 years with a baseball show on MLB-Mark Patrick. He will not be in awe of the major league players. He is a smart kid and wants to be a closer. Maybe I am wrong but I think the National's have the worst record in baseball when they bring in a releif pitcher and they have fewer saves than any team.

Posted by: ebe1 | June 10, 2009 9:14 AM | Report abuse

First of all, to all of the idiots claiming that the Nats are doing this to save money, get a clue!! History shows that they have signed EVERY top pick, with the exception of Crow and his ridiculous demands, and have been criticized for giving players first round money in later rounds.
Secondly, the Nats picked two players that have been labeled "closest to Major league ready" which in my book makes them the best player period!!

Posted by: dckidwell | June 10, 2009 10:13 AM | Report abuse

Good pick based on need - but who really knows. For all the bad press this year about the pitching, I'm pretty content all of a sudden thinking they're going in the right direction with stockpiling Lannan, Zimmerman, Martis, Stammen, Detwiler, Balester, McGeary,and I'm forgetting a couple more. If you keep rotating these guys between AAA and the Bigs they'll develop nicely. And the bullpen has come together nicely too with Bergmann,Villone, Beimel, and McDougal. I think I saw a stat last night that the bullpen ERA has been 2.94 in the last three weeks. If Strasburg and Storen pan out you've got alot to choose from but admittedly still alot of young arms and inexperience to grow through the next several years. Still would love to see Glavine added just for his wisdom for a year or two. Since this year has turned into pretty much another audition year I say just give them all some decent experience at the top level and see what develops for next year.

Posted by: AsstGM | June 10, 2009 11:34 AM | Report abuse

"The Storen pick is bad because there were 3 or 4 high school pitchers, Crow, Alex White and maybe even Tanner Scheppers still on the board. All are viewed as better pitchers by almost every publication I have read and all are rumored to have wanted more money to sign than Storen."

What are you doing taking something seriously that you read in a baseball publication? Don't you know they're just parroting one another?

Posted by: Samson151 | June 10, 2009 11:36 AM | Report abuse

That strikeout to walk ratio is impressive, but what about the 3.80 ERA? In college?

Posted by: Samson151 | June 10, 2009 11:37 AM | Report abuse

asstgm: "Still would love to see Glavine added just for his wisdom for a year or two."

Why would he want to pitch here, as opposed to some club with a winning record?

Posted by: Samson151 | June 10, 2009 11:38 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company