Network News

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

The Strasburg Watch: Now What? (Plus, Some Links)

One day very soon, there will be an ice-breaking telephone call, a coordination of calendars and, quite likely, a small block of seats hastily booked on a trans-continental flight. And the Stephen Strasburg negotiations, with all their weighty implications, will formally begin.

But that day will not be today.

Today, the Major League Baseball draft -- of which Strasburg, the San Diego State right-hander, was the first overall pick by the Nationals last night -- will enter Day 2 (rounds 4-30; 31-50 are Thursday). In Newport Beach, Calif., Strasburg will hold a news conference at the offices of his agent, having decided (or having had someone decide for him) that it was in his best interests to decline the Nationals' request that he speak by conference call with the local media last night, as per tradition.

And one more day will tick off the calendar, leaving, by tomorrow, just 67 days until the Aug. 17 deadline for signing picks.

"There's a little bit of lull before the groundbreaking conversation," Nationals acting GM Mike Rizzo said in a recent interview. "Just let things settle down a little bit. And then at some time in the near future, soon after that, there will be a trip -- somwhere. Either us to [Strasburg's] representatives, or his representatives to us. There's no real script as to how it goes down."

Boras's modus operandi is to deal directly with ownership, because -- much as the bank robber explained why he robbed banks -- that's where the money is. That notion was reflected in a Boras quote in my story that ran yesterday: "The owners are the ones who dictate the philosophy of the franchise. The employee -- his philosophy is not relevant." (Someone on the other side of the table could also point out that it ought to be Strasburg, not Boras, who dictates the player's philosophy.)

Of course, thanks to the Nationals' failed run at first baseman Mark Teixeira this winter, there is a history -- by all accounts overwhelmingly positive -- between Boras and the Lerners. It is understood within the industry that the Nationals' massive offer for Teixeira, believed to have been close to $200 million and the highest of any suitor, drove up Teixeira's market and ultimately benefitted both client and agent. Whether or not you believe in conspiracy theories, it certainly was not a negative as we approach another Boras/Lerner negotiation.

"I'd say Mark and Ted [Lerner], from what I know from the Teixeira talks, have a desire to put a face on this franchise and a desire to make the franchise better," Boras said in a recent interview. "I think there is a newness to them, where they want to put their specific stamp on their franchise... One thing I got from the Lerners is they are going to make their own decisions. They're going to do what they feel is best for them and their franchise."

Translation: "Just because the standard compensation package for No. 1 overall draft picks has been in the $6 million-$8 million range in recent years, I hope the Lerners won't allow outside interests -- namely, Bud Selig and his lieutenants, plus fellow owners -- to dissuade him from breaking with convention and giving Strasburg four or five times that much money."

Meantime, here is Bud Selig, as quoted by the Associated Press last night: "It's now in Washington's hands. They know what draft picks have gotten [in the past]. Everybody knows. So they're on their own."

Translation: "They're on their own, except for when we call them up and threaten them with contraction if they go one dime over the previous record."

Finally, a word about the Nationals' picks at Nos. 10, 50 and 81 overall: There was a lot of dissatisfaction expressed among commenters on this blog, and elsewhere, about the quality of those picks. Many accused the Nationals of outright lies when they said they took the best players available with those picks. But my view is, when you're facing something as monumental and complex as the Strasburg negotiations, the last thing you need is a bunch of difficult negotiations among your other picks. If the Nationals constructed their draft board out of players they felt would be relatively easy signs, then made their picks based on the best player available on their board, I don't have a problem with that.

And before we go accusing the Lerners of going cheap here, remember this: If they wind up giving Strasburg, say, $15 million (a ballpark figure I'm using based on conversations with industry insiders), then give everyone else the same money their corresponding pick got a year ago (that would be $2.07 million for No. 10, $900,000 for No. 50 and $490,000 for No. 81, and so on down the line), they would wind up paying out around $20 million total to their draft picks -- which, as best I can tell, would be the most in history.

Here is Chico's account of last night's events. Note the suggestion that the signing of No. 10 overall pick Drew Storen could be announced as early as today.

Here is Mark Viera's gamer from last night. Another game, another loss. And here is a little more on Jordan Zimmermann's elbow "fatigue."

From elsewhere on the internets... Here is Baseball America's in-depth scouting reports on the first round, and a look at the top players still available on Day 2.

Storen's hometown paper tells about the scene at the Storen household last night.

And a familiar face ends up in Kansas City.

Chico will be checking in here later after Strasburg's conference call. And we'll have plenty more on the Nationals' remaining picks today. Enjoy your morning.

By Dave Sheinin  |  June 10, 2009; 8:13 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: And Finally, With Overall Pick No. 81...
Next: Strasburg And Boras Hold Court

Comments

F1rst

Posted by: Lipty | June 10, 2009 9:26 AM | Report abuse

Horrible 3rd round pick. To pick a 10th round rated guy in the third round is...simply ridiculous!!!!

Posted by: Lipty | June 10, 2009 9:27 AM | Report abuse

I am hoping and praying that A.J. Morris falls to us on our next pick.

getting him would completely and utterly make up for the signability reach that is Trevor Holder.

If God doesn't hate the Nationals, Morris will fall to us.

Posted by: MrMadison | June 10, 2009 9:37 AM | Report abuse

Sheinz,

I don't disagree with you - but don't you think then that Rizzo was at least disingenuous when saying all that BPA stuff last week? At least let fans know that the negotiations are going to impact the overall draft strategy - "we're building our board with a mind to the overall budget that we'll have to sign the players we choose" - but that's not what he said. More than that, he specifically denied building a board that way. So, on that score, it's disingenuous at best (of course, maybe being a journalist you've got thicker calluses for disingenuousness).

Well, whatever, crying over spilled milk is silly and crying that that's not how I would have done it is silly, so here's hoping that Storen is Papelbon, Kobernus is Utley and Holder is Oswalt.

Posted by: Highway295Revisited | June 10, 2009 9:39 AM | Report abuse

So just because it would be "harder" to conduct multiple negotiations with BPA picks they take guys slotted way lower than their value? What? I didn't realize Al Davis had taken over the franchise. Penny wise and pound foolish is precisely why the 'Nats are a laughingstock. I root b/c I waited 33+ years for a team, but the Lerner's have no clue what they are doing and when handed high picks (3 in the top 50 and 4 in the top 80ish) they decide that expediency is better than talent?

Sorry, but Kasten et al. are *paid* and quite handsomely, I'm guessing to do exactly what ownership or Rizzo or Kasten seemed to avoid - plucking top talent regardless of the price tag that will fit best into the long-term plan for the team. Bravo, Lerner Family. You are making the Snyder Era look halycon by comparison.

Posted by: terrapin31590us | June 10, 2009 9:40 AM | Report abuse

"Horrible 3rd round pick. To pick a 10th round rated guy in the third round is...simply ridiculous!!!!"

You have a lot to learn about the baseball draft.

Posted by: JDB1 | June 10, 2009 9:42 AM | Report abuse

NEW POSTED

For three years as a high school coach, our team played against Brandon Inge a couple of times each year. He was obviously a very good high school ball player - started on varsity his freshman year and by senior year was all-district, etc. But there were other very good ball players of his caliber as well. I am not aware of any of them making it to the major leagues - let alone having a career such as Brandon.

At the risk of minimizing raw talent and the necessary work ethic - projection truly seems to be a craphoot at some level.Three years around high school ball certainly was not enough time to make me an expert.

__________________________
". . .I've actually seen two guys play high school baseball who became number one draft picks out of high school. . . . And I couldn't honestly tell you that I thought either guy was a number one pick when I was watching them.

Posted by: lowcountry | June 10, 2009 9:35 AM |

Posted by: lowcountry | June 10, 2009 9:42 AM | Report abuse

Did anyone else note that, as reported in the story in the KC paper, Crow wants the same money he wanted last year. Good luck with that, kid.

Posted by: baltova1 | June 10, 2009 9:48 AM | Report abuse

I know this sounds too simple, but why doesn't Lerner just put 18 million on the table, where it will remain until August 17? Be clear that the number will not go up, and the Nats are prepared to let Strasburg follow the path of Crow. It's nearly twice as much as any previous signing, but it doesn't shatter the slot system like 25 million or more.

Posted by: BShea82 | June 10, 2009 9:51 AM | Report abuse

lowcountry, obviously I agree with you. Pick any high school prospect and try to gauge how many times in his high school career, he will face another player of similar talent in a pitcher-hitter matchup. A handful of times? Once? Maybe never?

I realize there are more and more traveling teams and tournaments that bring together the best players. But it's still a crapshoot, far tougher than the NBA and NFL drafts.

Posted by: baltova1 | June 10, 2009 9:53 AM | Report abuse

BShea82, the only problem with your idea is that the Nats can't afford to **** around anymore.

Posted by: JhonnyBheGhood | June 10, 2009 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Don't the Nats have the first pick today? It's the start of the fourth round, right? So, A.J. Morris has already fallen to the Nats next pick.

Posted by: combedge | June 10, 2009 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Despite covering some truly dreadful baseball, Chico has been writing the heck out of the gamers.

This sentence, though, is just gorgeous. The whole posts drips with an understandable cynicism, but nothing beats this line.

It's worth noting that Viera also contributed a good gamer.

What bothers me is that Eckstein's tirade after the last called strike is now a DMTP nugget. It's understandable, given the business of yesterday. Maybe it'll be revisited if he gets fined.

-----

Boras's modus operandi is to deal directly with ownership, because -- much as the bank robber explained why he robbed banks -- that's where the money is.

Posted by: JohninMpls | June 10, 2009 10:04 AM | Report abuse

I'm not a draft geek, and so I don't have any particular opinion about the Nat's lower round picks, however...

If the Nats really did make these picks based on the notion that it would be too hard to negotiate with Strasburg and other picks at the same time, then the entire front office of the Nats needs to be kicked to curb.

The Nats are in desperate need of rebuilding their farm system, and boo-freaking-hoo if they have to spend some money do it ($20 million? Isn't about how far under the MLB average their payroll is this year?)

It's too complicated to negotiate with more than one pick at time? Give me a freaking break. Hire some bleeping accountants.

Posted by: joebleux | June 10, 2009 10:05 AM | Report abuse

Why didn't Crow sign the re-draft consent form? He'd have had the Nats over the barrel, since they wouldn't have the safety net of a compensatory pick.

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

Eckstein's tirade after Kearn's strikeout last night was really helped by the way MASN handles small crowd situations. In the late innings of rain-delayed games when there's pretty much no one in the stands, they really crank up their mics inside the stadium to create the illusion of crowd noise for their broadcast. As a result of that last night, every word of Eckstein's tirade was picked up and went out over the air loud and clear. It's too bad he didn't drop a few f-bombs or call the ump a mofo. That would have been quite an entertaining end to what was ultimately a depressing viewing experience last night.

Posted by: nunof1 | June 10, 2009 10:13 AM | Report abuse

Don't the Nats have the first pick today? It's the start of the fourth round, right? So, A.J. Morris has already fallen to the Nats next pick.

Posted by: combedge | June 10, 2009 10:00 AM

I think there is another supplemental round first. for FA compensation.

then the 4th round, where we have the first pick.

Posted by: MrMadison | June 10, 2009 10:17 AM | Report abuse

if crow would have consented the nats would have passed him over anyway. just side step the extra drama.

you all ever see this?

http://www.unitedcountriesofbaseball.com/images/UCOB-1280x960.jpg

Posted by: longterm | June 10, 2009 10:19 AM | Report abuse

JiM - it does seem to suggest that he was never really eager to come to the Nats. Otherwise, I see no apparent downside to sigining a consent form.
_________________
Why didn't Crow sign the re-draft consent form? He'd have had the Nats over the barrel, since they wouldn't have the safety net of a compensatory pick.

Posted by: lowcountry | June 10, 2009 10:20 AM | Report abuse

In other (okay, fake) news, a Manny-Papi road trip:

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/manny_ramirez_to_david_ortiz_road

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | June 10, 2009 10:28 AM | Report abuse

"But there were other very good ball players of his caliber as well. I am not aware of any of them making it to the major leagues - let alone having a career such as Brandon."

This reminds me of a guy I met at a friend's Christmas Party who played baseball in the same division as UVa (hmm, maybe even for UVa, it was three years ago and it was a mostly boring conversation, other than the following) and he said that Ryan Zimmerman when he started didn't seem special at all, he was just like every other player. Baseball is just flukey like that as players grow into their adult frames.

As far as the other draft picks, I fear that they were made to help the team this year, which would mean abandoning The Plan.

Posted by: Section506 | June 10, 2009 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Mentioning Ryan Zimmerman brings something else to mind. He signed very quickly, didn't he? So, was he a "signability pick"? How'd that one work out anyway?

Posted by: nunof1 | June 10, 2009 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Baseball is good. Written by Viera, even better.

Posted by: softballgirl | June 10, 2009 10:53 AM | Report abuse

Good one, softballgirl.

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | June 10, 2009 10:55 AM | Report abuse

I've missed some of the other posts so maybe this is ground already trodden, but am I wrong to feel a little insulted that SS didn't agree to participate in what wd have been the Nats' conf call with the media? What are we, chopped liver? Um...maybe I shd rephrase that...
I also missed Eckstein's tirade, nunof1--I take it he was angry at the umpire's call?

Posted by: Section109 | June 10, 2009 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Zimmerman was a first-round, No. 4 overall pick that signed the day he was drafted. He had already been the AVG leader on 2004 Team USA (he started most of the games) that won the gold, which most people say upped his value.

Don't remember if he signed for over-slot.

And he seems like he might work out.

Posted by: Section506 | June 10, 2009 10:57 AM | Report abuse

"I think there is another supplemental round first. for FA compensation."

It's only one pick. Forget which team

Posted by: JDB1 | June 10, 2009 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Should we just rename this blog "Strasburg Watch"?

Posted by: Kev29 | June 10, 2009 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Strasburg Insider

Posted by: Section506 | June 10, 2009 11:07 AM | Report abuse

That better be some "in-depth" coverage, 506. Not sure any of us are ready for that.

Posted by: faNATic | June 10, 2009 11:09 AM | Report abuse

What bothers me is that Eckstein's tirade after the last called strike is now a DMTP nugget.

------

Okay, I give up: DMTP?

Posted by: baltova1 | June 10, 2009 11:10 AM | Report abuse

Zimmerman signed for $2.975 million. Braun went #5 for $2.45 million and Jeff Clement at #3 with $3.4 million.

Of course, I now feel dumb for wondering whether an MLB owned team signed someone for over-slot.

Posted by: Section506 | June 10, 2009 11:10 AM | Report abuse

"I also missed Eckstein's tirade, nunof1--I take it he was angry at the umpire's call?"

To put it mildly. Good thing it's still illegal (I think) to bring firearms into Nationals Park. More than likely if the game hadn't already ended with that call he'd have been tossed.

Posted by: nunof1 | June 10, 2009 11:14 AM | Report abuse

Why is everyone so angry that Rizzo said signability was not going to be an issue? What general manager would ever go on record and say "Well frankly, as all our time and money is going to be tied up into a draft choice that we have been forced into by a pissed off fan base, and a very weak draft class, we're going to pick which ever guy will be grateful enough to sign for slot quickly'.

People using the media to leverage negotiation and for effect cannot be a new concept to people who live in DC? Can it? Are we that naive? Not only that, he has picked guys who look like solid performers. It's a tactic used by such other notable organisations as Boston and Arizona (was anyone really overwhelmed by Pedria's tools? Youkalis? Were they?).

Posted by: soundbloke | June 10, 2009 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Sorry. DMTP = didn't make the paper. Svrlugaism, later adopted by Chico.

Also, Zimm's agent is also Storen's agent, as has been previously noted. Now THAT'S signability.

Posted by: JohninMpls | June 10, 2009 11:18 AM | Report abuse

hey gang I missed the game...can some one give me an account of the Eckstien thing? I mean, wow-a Nats coach expressing anger at a call. Headline news!

Posted by: zendo | June 10, 2009 11:22 AM | Report abuse

The video of it on mlb.com in the Kearns argues call video.

Posted by: soundbloke | June 10, 2009 11:24 AM | Report abuse

"Mentioning Ryan Zimmerman brings something else to mind. He signed very quickly, didn't he? So, was he a "signability pick"?

Nope. He was a consensus top-five talent in that draft, and a no-brainer for the Nats in that slot.

A sign that a "signability pick" has been made is when the guy you draft is rated far lower than several players still on the board -- which was precisely what occurred when Storen was drafted at No. 10. This doesn't mean the Nats can't be defended for making the pick, but you also shouldn't conflate the Zimmerman and Storen drafts just because both signed (or will sign) quickly.

Posted by: JhonnyBheGhood | June 10, 2009 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Does anybody even really care about the games for the rest of this season?

Posted by: natsguy | June 10, 2009 11:27 AM | Report abuse

I've come to believe that the single biggest factor on the Nats' side in the Strasburg negotiations is this year's crummy team. Unless a miracle happens, we'll have the worst record again, which gives us the first pick in next year's draft. If Strasburg doesn't sign, we'll get the second pick as compensation.

That means he'd either have to give the Nats another try next year or accept being the third pick in next year's draft. It's impossible for me to believe he'd get more money waiting a year to be picked by the Royals, Indians, D-Backs or (gasp) Orioles. I also don't think Japan is a possibility.

I think he'll wait until Aug. 17 to sign but I think he'll sign. I'm not sure he'll pitch this year, though.

Posted by: baltova1 | June 10, 2009 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Ok, so if we assume SS will be signed SOMETIME before Aug 17, regardless of price, when does this esteemed panel think the signing will happen?

Posted by: outsider6 | June 10, 2009 11:37 AM | Report abuse

"A sign that a "signability pick" has been made is when the guy you draft is rated far lower than several players still on the board -- which was precisely what occurred when Storen was drafted at No. 10."

Which board is this of which you speak? The Nats have their board, every other team has its board, the various publications and commenters have their boards. Probably forty or more boards out there, no two of them alike. Thirty of them (the team boards) are unknown to anyone but that particular team. There's no scouting combine in MLB, like in the NFL. Teams don't share their scouting info with each other.

So out of all these boards, which is the definitive one that lays out how the draft *should* play out?

Posted by: nunof1 | June 10, 2009 11:43 AM | Report abuse

Does anybody even really care about the games for the rest of this season?
Posted by: natsguy
------------------------------
Absolutely! The beauty of baseball is that every day is a new game, and the score is 0-0. I try to appreciate one game at a time, whether or not they mean anything in the long run. I remember yelling at my wife for turning off a game in September a couple of years ago when the Nat's were down 7-0 to Atlanta. Why did I care? Because a rookie named Detwiler was slated to pitch the 8th.

I think that the most interesting quesiton to be answered the rest of this year will be how our young arms will do. I'm not worried as much about Ws and Ls. I'm looking more towards ERAs and Ks to BBs.

Posted by: twinbrook | June 10, 2009 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Does anybody even really care about the games for the rest of this season?

natsguy, that's cold. But it's got a kernel of truth in it. I care about the innings pitched by the young starters. The rest of it? Meh.

Posted by: baltova1 | June 10, 2009 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Mentioning Ryan Zimmerman brings something else to mind. He signed very quickly, didn't he? So, was he a "signability pick"? How'd that one work out anyway?

Posted by: nunof1 | June 10, 2009 10:44 AM | Report abuse

wrong. He wasn't a signability pick. he was the consensus best player available at pick #4. it was a no-brainer. there wasn't a player in that draft worth taking at that pick over him, as far as I remember.

I don't remember anyone even coming close to suggesting that he was a a reach at #4 or a cheap pick.

nice try though.

Posted by: MrMadison | June 10, 2009 11:58 AM | Report abuse

hrm...

a method to the madness?

http://natsfarm.com/2009/06/10/uncovering-a-draft-philosophy/

Posted by: MrMadison | June 10, 2009 12:00 PM | Report abuse

"Which board is this of which you speak?"

The board listing the players remaining to be drafted. I know you're trying to be facile here by asking "which board?" but not many people who cared about such things would have placed Storen on a level with Green or White or Scheppers (who a lot of teams passed on, granted). I know this, and I don't even follow the baseball draft very closely.

The Nats will and have said that they picked the best player available according to their internal assessments. And that's fine. But it appears that objective evaluators would not agree.

Again, though, this isn't to say the pick can't be defended. It could be a good pick, based on what the Nats need. But every pick is a balance of various needs, and the need to select an affordable guy who would sign quickly seemed to weigh heavily here.

Posted by: JhonnyBheGhood | June 10, 2009 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Storen has signed

Posted by: lowcountry | June 10, 2009 12:02 PM | Report abuse

also, rumor has it that Storen has already agreed to a contract.

if so, that helps validate the pick a good bit, as he can go on and get started right away, and potentially be in line for a september call-up, much like Zimmerman was in 2005.

Posted by: MrMadison | June 10, 2009 12:05 PM | Report abuse

oh, well yeah...ok. it ain't rumor anymore i guess. lol.

Posted by: MrMadison | June 10, 2009 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Morris drafted in 4th

Posted by: 1of9000 | June 10, 2009 12:08 PM | Report abuse

This is an interesting perspective on leverage.

What does MLB say regarding slot in that situation? Technically, if the Nats fail to sign Strasburg, they'll get the 1 and 1a picks next year (assuming they finish with the worst record). If Strasburg were picked next, he would technically be the number two pick.

In terms of contracts, does MLB consider that the second slot? And does the 1a pick, for that matter, deserve first slot money?

-----

That means he'd either have to give the Nats another try next year or accept being the third pick in next year's draft.

Posted by: JohninMpls | June 10, 2009 12:10 PM | Report abuse

I can't say I am upset by the Storen draft, especially if he's signed this fast.

it's just the Holder selection is puzzling.

and I don't see anyone here making any sense of it. all I see is "I know it all, and you don't" or "I'm just gonna be sarcastic because I don't have anything meaningful to say".

I'll ask again, someone please explain to me what it is about Holder that made him the best player on ANYONE'S board at pick 81?

Posted by: MrMadison | June 10, 2009 12:10 PM | Report abuse

and yeah! we took Morris!

Posted by: MrMadison | June 10, 2009 12:10 PM | Report abuse

""Which board is this of which you speak?"

The board listing the players remaining to be drafted. I know you're trying to be facile here by asking "which board?" but not many people who cared about such things would have placed Storen on a level with Green or White or Scheppers (who a lot of teams passed on, granted). I know this, and I don't even follow the baseball draft very closely."

Perhaps the fact that you don't follow the draft very closely ties into you not knowing much about this board you keep mentioning. "Next player on the board" - that implies the existence of some definitive ranked list of players in numerical order in which they should be picked under the "best player available" philosophy. There is no such list.

Posted by: nunof1 | June 10, 2009 12:11 PM | Report abuse

"Next player on the board" - that implies the existence of some definitive ranked list of players in numerical order in which they should be picked under the "best player available" philosophy. There is no such list.

Posted by: nunof1 | June 10, 2009 12:11 PM | Report abuse

so then you are saying that all this "Honor The Board" and "we are going to take the Best Player Available on our Board" propoganda of the past week or so was just meaningless fluffery from our Front Office?

cool, ok.

Posted by: MrMadison | June 10, 2009 12:13 PM | Report abuse

"Next player on the board" - that implies the existence of some definitive ranked list of players in numerical order in which they should be picked under the "best player available" philosophy. There is no such list.

Posted by: nunof1 | June 10, 2009 12:11 PM | Report abuse

so then you are saying that all this "Honor The Board" and "we are going to take the Best Player Available on our Board" propoganda of the past week or so was just meaningless fluffery from our Front Office, because the so-called "board" they were referring to is non-existant?

cool, ok.

just out of curiosity...are you a member of the Nats Scouting staff? can you confirm that the draft board is fictitious, and that when Rizzo was going on and on about how much effort it took to assemble this fictitious board and how the mantra of the Scouting staff was "Honor The Board" and that signability/money was never going to be an factor and that they were going to pick the top player on the board every time no matter what...he was just flat-out lying?

Posted by: MrMadison | June 10, 2009 12:16 PM | Report abuse

LHP Miguel Pena in the 5th round.

Posted by: AtomicOvermind | June 10, 2009 12:22 PM | Report abuse

"I'll ask again, someone please explain to me what it is about Holder that made him the best player on ANYONE'S board at pick 81?"

How about this, from Nationals national cross-checker Deric Ladnier:

"And (Tyler) Holder—to a man—everybody felt like this guy was going to be a quality starter. We’ve seen him up to 94MPH, slider, change up; he’s around the zone and once again—big strong durable with great makeup."

Sounds like they did more than just look at his statistics and his writeup in Baseball America. Looks like they think maybe they found something.

And really, if you're just going to let BA or the "consensus picks" drive your draft, why have scouts at all? Just do like Marge Schott and fire them all because all they do is watch baseball games every day.


Posted by: nunof1 | June 10, 2009 12:25 PM | Report abuse

"so then you are saying that all this "Honor The Board" and "we are going to take the Best Player Available on our Board" propoganda of the past week or so was just meaningless fluffery from our Front Office?"

No. The board they are honoring is the one THEY put together, which of course no one else has access to. Not some ESPN or BA or other media-driven board. When they say "best player available" that means best player available ON THEIR BOARD. How hard is that to understand?

Posted by: nunof1 | June 10, 2009 12:29 PM | Report abuse

New post. Feel free to read it or to prolong your bickering in the comments sections.

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | June 10, 2009 12:43 PM | Report abuse

"Does anybody even really care about the games for the rest of this season?"
____________________

Sure -- there are angles to every game and how they lead to how the roster will be comprised in 2010. I like the Nats' young starters on the whole, but I know that not all of them will pan out. Over the next three months, we can get a better focus on just who will be keepers.

From a team-vs.-team perspective, you can always play spoiler (as the Nats did to the Mets in 2007). And in the next two weeks, the Nats have series against the AL East's two evil empires (and no, I'm not referring to Tampa Bay or Toronto, or even Cuban Pete's despised Orioles). The Nats visit the Bronx next week, then the following Tuesday have three at home vs. Boston. It would be delicious to take the series from the Bosox and shut up all those Ivy League Red Sox fans who have high-level federal jobs in D.C. and will congregate to Nats Park for the only time this season.

Posted by: VPaterno | June 10, 2009 1:23 PM | Report abuse

hopefully he'll look like this

http://www.comcastsportsnet.tv/pages/inner_player?vidID=vidcast_9587&feedID=257&startclip=1

in about two months!

Posted by: nattylite88 | June 10, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

I think it's funny that people here actually think they know what they are talking about... the MLB draft is the biggest crapshoot in all of sports... Many many picks will never make it to the big leagues.

Albert Pujols was taken in the 13th round of the 1999 draft & 2 years later was the Rookie of the year... 37 hr's w/130 RBI at 21 years old. You think 30 teams would like a redo?

If 2-4 players of the entire 50 round draft contribute within 3-4 years, then they have done their job... Hell, if Strasburg is the ace everyone thinks he will be, any additional player that makes it to the bigs & contributes is a HUGE bonus.

Posted by: tony325 | June 10, 2009 5:29 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company