Network News

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

Second thoughts about Ian Desmond

Morning roundup

Ian Desmond might be a different, much more productive hitter when he bats second in the lineup. He has taken 67 at-bats this year from No. 2 hole, which, as Manager Jim Riggleman pointed out, is "probably too small a sampling to really gauge it."

So keep that in mind. But Desmond, after going 2 for 5 with two home runs last night in his 16th game as a two hitter, is now batting .313 with an .891 OPS from the second spot in the lineup.

"I wouldn't say it's anything about more comfortable," Desmond said. "I feel comfortable in the eight hole. It's not like when I was at-bat I didn't feel ready to hit. But there's no way around it - you get better pitches to hit when you've got [Adam] Dunn and [Ryan] Zimmerman hitting behind you. I feel like in the first half of the season, I was still competing. Now I'm just getting better pitches to hit and I'm doing a little more damage."

Batting eighth this year, Desmond has hit .254 with a .304 on-base percentage and a .388 slugging percentage. He has spent most of his rookie season in the eighth spot, which accentuates one of Desmond's weaknesses as hitter: chasing pitches out of the strike zone. Guzman has 23.44 plate appearances per walk this year, the lowest rate in the National League.

Now, Desmond can improve that as he matures as a player and a hitter. But in his rookie season, batting eighth only allowed him to swing at more curves and offspeed pitches darting out of the strike zone. Hitting second, he sees more fastballs and strikes, accentuating Desmond's best attribute as a hitter: his quick, powerful bat.

Anywhere he hits in the lineup, Desmond has been a better hitter lately. Since July 27, Desmond is 18 for 51 and has at least two hits in eight of his 15 games. Desmond has been more patient with his swing, more relaxed at the plate, "trying not to go get everything," he said. "Just trying to slow everything down."

Desmond watched old tape of himself from the minor leagues and earlier this year. The difference from then from right before the all-star break, when he was jumping at the ball, was "pretty shocking," he said.

If Desmond can hit from the second spot more often, those results might stand out just as much.

FROM THE POST

Scott Olsen got roughed up in a 9-5 loss to the Marlins, the Nationals' fourth straight loss.

NATS MINOR LEAGUES

Syracuse 7, Columbus 3: Wilson Ramos went 2 for 4 with a home run. Seth Bynum went 3 for 4 with a double. Brian Bixler went 3 for 5 with a double and four RBI.

Harrisburg 5, Binghamton 4: Stephen Lombardozzi went 2 for 4. Tom Milone allowed two earned runs in seven innings on six hits and no walks, striking out seven.

Lynchburg 4, Potomac 1: Tyler Moore went 2 for 4 with a double. Daniel Rosenbaum allowed three earned runs in 4 1/3 innings on eight hits and a walk, striking out three.

Vermont 12, Hudson Valley 4: Kevin Keyes went 1 for 3 with a grand slam and two walks. Wade Moore went 4 for 5 with a double. Blake Kelso went 2 for 5 with a double.

FROM AROUND THE WEB

The Nationals still can't draw conclusions about Scott Olsen, Mark Zuckerman writes.

Bryce Harper's college coach tells Byron Kerr that Harper is begging to play.

Joe Posnanski has an excellent look at defensive statistics.

By Adam Kilgore  |  August 12, 2010; 12:06 AM ET
Categories:  Ian Desmond  | Tags: Ian Desmond, Nationals offense  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Game 114 discussion thread: Nationals vs. Marlins
Next: Nationals Minor League Report

Comments

Olsen's pitching is confounding, Olsen's contract makes it even more so. $250,000 for last night, $250,000 for his next outing, and then $100,000 per outing after that.

BTW, CC Sabathia's contract of $161 Million for 7 years? If he averages 30 starts per year, he's making $766,000 per start.

If he averages 7 innings per start, that comes out to about $110,000 per inning.

If he averages 16 pitches per inning, that's about $6,850 per pitch.

Yeah, that's all absurd and all.
But if the Olsen incentives mean he'll earn $2,100,000 this year, so be it.
It's not the dumbest contract in the world. It's not even the dumbest contract in this posting.

Posted by: Sunderland | August 12, 2010 7:17 AM | Report abuse

Desmond can hit and he has great range, but as long as he continues to play stupidly he'll give up as many runs as he produces.

I don't understand how anyone with the error total he has can continue to make idiotic throws like the one he made last night. It ultimately didn't matter as the game was lost anyway, but at his age you have to wonder if he will ever learn.

Posted by: Meridian1 | August 12, 2010 7:52 AM | Report abuse

Meridian1, I totally agree. Desmond's problems aren't physical, they're mental. He plays nervous, at the plate and in the field, and he makes horrendous decisions and then makes the same horrendous decision (such as last night's throw). Which means he'll either figure it out and have a nice long career or he won't and he won't be around long.

Posted by: baltova1 | August 12, 2010 8:44 AM | Report abuse

Desmond is a better hitter with Zim and Dunn following him instead of Harris and the pitcher. Earthshattering.

He still has too many quick at bats but I'm pleased with the progress he's shown at the plate. Now in the field...

Posted by: SCNatsFan | August 12, 2010 8:46 AM | Report abuse

Desi' is a rookie, let him play through it all.

FYI the blog Uniwatch has a story about how the commissioner strong armed the Nationals to use the current logo on their hat.

Posted by: alex35332 | August 12, 2010 8:49 AM | Report abuse

Making mental mistakes shouldn't automatically be classified as stupid or idiotic. Pressure has a lot to do with it and that will be the advancement he makes or doesn't, playing more relaxed.

As for his hitting, you want your #8 hitter to be more agressive in situations that don't involve RISP. His average will naturally be lower, his average with RISP is still good.

With his natural aggressiveness, I think he is betrter suited to 6-8 in the lineup.

Posted by: sjt1455 | August 12, 2010 8:53 AM | Report abuse

I don't get the comments heere that Desmondwill either improve "or he won't be around?" Really? I don't hear anyone in the Nats' organization saying that, even though it's common sense that an error-prone shortstop is not really your drug of choice for the long haul.

But the Nats inexplicably seem enamored of Desmond; from their perspective apparently he can do no wrong. Riggleman's quote is telling: "I mean, who (else) could have gotten to that ball?" The fact that Desmond threw the ball away obviously has no bearing on the way the Nats' FO perceives our SS.

He's a lifer in a lame organization.

Posted by: JohnRDC | August 12, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Adam we know you have to write about something but another fluffer on Ian Desmond is grating on my nerves. BLUF: Ian Desmond will be here next year thats a given, the position he plays and hole he bats in are the questions.

Okay now after spending two unbelievable sweaty nights in Section 213 I'm having second thoughts about the longevity of Gentlemen Jim and his pitching coach. Things are really going south folks, this team is 10-14 since the ASB and fading fast. Oh yeah they do get the DBacks over the weekend but even that team seems to be on a recent rise. BTW that kid Hudson that was supposed to be in the ChiSOX-Dunn mix is now 3-0 with a 1.XX ERA in three games so far with the DBacks since being traded for EJAX. Hmmmmm, I guess Mike "The pitching will come to us" Rizzo missed that one. Thats okay looks like Scott Olsen will be sending Uncle Ted and Mini Me into convulsions collecting that Nats x-tra cash after each start and who can forget the 15M man (no not the SS) but none other then the Marquis de-sad, that guy is going to pick up another cool 7.5M of Uncle Teds coin next year and it might be as someone reminded us last week "another sunk cost"!

Posted by: TippyCanoe | August 12, 2010 9:35 AM | Report abuse

"Guzman has 23.44 plate appearances per walk this year, the lowest rate in the National League."
Is this a typo? Or am I just confused as to why you'd mention no longer on the team Guzman in an article on Desmond without posting a comparable walk rate?

Posted by: souldrummer | August 12, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

" Riggleman's quote is telling: "I mean, who (else) could have gotten to that ball?" "

Great. So he turned a single fielded by an outfielder into a single fielded by an infielder, then turned into a double with an ill-advised throw. And Riggleman sounds more or less OK with that?

It looks like all he needs to do is calm down and make better decisions. But will that ever happen? Looks like we'll have another year to find out.

Posted by: zimbar | August 12, 2010 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Who cares how well he hits? He could be batting .500 and I still wouldn't want him in the lineup unless it was an AL interleague game and he could be the DH.

He shouldn't be in the majors. He's proven again and again he just cannot play shortstop at this level, and is apparently uncoachably bad, because his defense just doesn't ever seem to improve.

And his 'range' is a non-factor because he never holds the ball when he should (like last night), and he botches the routine plays all the time.

Send him down, take him off the 40 man roster, and let some other team Rule 5 him and then suffer through a season of having to keep him on the active roster. At least then he won't be the Nats' problem any more.

Posted by: zaph | August 12, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

@JohnRDC

I don't think its common practice for managers and front office types to rip and/or threaten benching or cutting a rookie or any player for that matter. The team always publicly backs its players with some line like "he's got to work on some things, but he'll figure it out," or "he shows a lot of potential he just needs to be more consistent."

Of course Riggleman is going to support Desmond. The Nats said they are going to give Desmond a chance to prove himself and they are, like it or not, for the whole season. They are going to support him publicy, even though they might be working on other options for next season behind the scenes.

Also, for the record, other shortstops have had miserable seasons fielding wise at the beginning of their careers and gone on to be respectable major leaguers.

1978 Ozzie Smith - 25 errors
1980 Ozzie Smith - 24 errors
1983 Cal Ripken Jr. - 25 errors
1984 Cal Ripken Jr. - 26 errors
1985 Cal Ripken Jr. - 26 errors
1996 Derek Jeter - 22 errors
1997 Nomar Garciaparra - 21 errors
1997 Alex Rodriguez - 24 errors
1998 Nomar Garciaparra - 25 errors
2000 Derek Jeter - 24 errors (in his "prime")

Granted, Desmond already has 27 errors with more than a month left to play, so odds are he will be well over 30 when its all said and done. But, I don't think we should rule him out as the long-term answer at shortstop just because he has been shaky in his rookie year. It's clear he has the range, arm and general athleticism to play the position, he just has to figure out how to mentally deal with the 162-game grind of a major league season.

Posted by: SpashCity | August 12, 2010 10:01 AM | Report abuse

Desmond is young and still needs to learn a lot. I think brining Espinosa up to challenge him either in September on next Spring will show who he really is.

Posted by: markfd | August 12, 2010 10:08 AM | Report abuse

souldrummer, probably just too used to talking about Guzman when he talks bad walk rates. Amazingly, Desmond's is even worse!

Posted by: 202character | August 12, 2010 10:21 AM | Report abuse

SplashCity:
You left another good one off your summary.
1974 Robin Yount - 44 errors.

Posted by: BinM | August 12, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

I'm with those who say Desi is a rookie and it is far from clear what kind of player he will be. Baseball is a long-outlook game, and a high error rate in a rookie year does not preclude a future as an MLB caliber player, as SplashCity's post demonstrates. Cause for concern? Yes. Cause for jettisoning him? No.

Zim had more than a few errors in his rookie 3B year, and still has some poor throws (including managing to sail one over Dunn's head last night, which is sorta like sailing one over the Capitol dome). It is normal for a rookie to be nervous and it is normal for him to take time to adjust to the pace of MLB. Patience people, patience. If this continues next year, we have a problem. This year we have lots of problems, but our rookie SS isn't high on the list.

Posted by: NatsFly | August 12, 2010 10:39 AM | Report abuse

Robin Yount was 18 years old in 1974 when he committed all those errors. Desi, let us not forget, turns 25 later this year. Brewers, BTW, shifted Yount to OF when he was 29.

Posted by: CapPeterson1 | August 12, 2010 10:40 AM | Report abuse

I know some of you tend to tune the Boz out when he writes about the NATS do some (most) of you may have forgotten Boz's column on Desmond back in late April or early May when he stated that Des would make a lot of errors this season and would improve a lot less the next and produced a list similar to Splash's illustrating his point. So, I say wait until next season (your choice at when specificallt) to make a "final" decision on Des. That is what the NATS are going to do.

As for pitching, We must wait till next season for those answers also. For now, we can only hope that Stras (most likely) and Olsen (who knows) do better next start and that Zimmermann (again who knows) can take up where he left off laat season. Who would have thought that Livo would end up being our Ace/Stoppr?

Sec 204 Row H Seat 7

Posted by: adhardwick | August 12, 2010 10:43 AM | Report abuse

It's not like we have Ripkin in the minors and Desmond is blocking his progress. The only decision is if he or Espinosa (assuming we think he is a future middle infielder) is moved to second base.

Posted by: SCNatsFan | August 12, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

As usual SCNatsFan, you are right on the money.

Sec 204 Row H Seat 7

Posted by: adhardwick | August 12, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

adhardwick, it amazes we are talking about Livo in the way we are; I thought, at best, he'd have the role Batista has. There are alot of candidates for the rotation next year and that gives me hope; its not like Jerome Williams and Levon Speigner are being counted on to solifify the rotation anymore. Maybe I'm just a homer wanting to see good things but I like the pitching staff and the direction of the position players; I'd still be real happy to see Dunn sign a 4 year on the bottom line.

Posted by: SCNatsFan | August 12, 2010 11:18 AM | Report abuse

Re: Desmond: The errors are bad, but it's not like Jeter out there where anything up the middle is a single. You miss 100% of the balls you don't get to, and Desmond does make a play on plenty of borderline balls. Range doesn't make the errors irrelevant, but don't pretend it doesn't make a difference. Someone with poor range really hurts you. (And I'm not talking about someone like Ripken who may have below-average speed but excellent arm, positioning, and reach: Ripken posted great range factors, statistically. I'm talking Gold Glove winners D. Jeter and M. Young who just couldn't find a way to stop a lot of those grounders)

Also, he's young. I'd rather see errors than a lack of range, because he's got a much better chance of cutting down errors than adding range.

Would you rather have Guzman there? Because he booted plays too, and never walked either. And he had no power potential, his range was decreasing, and his hitting was not going to get better.

Posted by: 202character | August 12, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

CapPeterson1 makes a good point about Robin Yount being moved to OF at the age of 29. I say good point because a)Yount went on to become a very good defensive outfielder as well as maintaining his hitting ability and b)I recall a lot of people here and on other Nats web sites getting all out of joint when Riggleman casually mentioned that Desmond might make a good outfielder.

Posted by: CHAMP1464 | August 12, 2010 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Do the Nats ever lose to Florida by a run or two or is it always a blowout? Seems like the latter. Of all the NL East teams, it seems like they just have our number (sort of like how we have the Mets'). :)

Posted by: PattyinSJ | August 12, 2010 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Desmond is a dilemma. Can't move him to the outfield because they need better hitting out there, not a guy who's potential at the plate is optimistically .275/.325/.450. He's a starter on a good team only if he can stick as an excellent defensive shortstop. Maybe he's improved enough as the year has progressed to make that seem realistic. Or maybe it's worth trying him at second. Either way, he's a big question mark going into 2010.

Posted by: jcj5y | August 12, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

I have to say it was very dispiriting to sit in the sweltering heat the past two nights and watch two "stinker" games. So I'm even more cynical today than usual.
I think the bottom line is that we are going to continue to suffer through Desmond because he is cheap - a mere 400k this year. The FO knows this team is not going anywhere this year or next so they can afford to see if the predictions of his impending stardom magically come to pass. Never mind that his fielding percentage is worst among MLB shortstops by a whopping 11 percentage points, he has more errors than any other MLB player, his OPS is second lowest among MLB rookies (an NJ stat), and his vaunted range as measured by OZR/150 is now 18th among 22 rated MLB shortstops.
There are a lot of loyal Nats fans and I think we deserve better.

Posted by: longhorn64 | August 12, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse


Yes, Desmond routinely muffs routine plays, but his range clearly is a plus.

Zimmerman has said that Desmond just needs to learn to wait a beat. Maybe that will come in time. I think his pop and his range make the upside worth another year.

Maybe Desmond is like the new NFL quarterbacks who look awful in their first season. It takes time before the game slows down.

Posted by: Drew8 | August 12, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse

I don't know why Washington fans are so impatient. We never seem to want to let guys develop. We just want a winner right now. Who cares if Ian Desmond is booting balls at SS? We're in the basement and we're not getting out. Let him get it out of his system this year. There's a chance he'll be better next year. If he's not then play Espinosa. What about Espinosa at SS and Desmond at 2B? Maybe we land a free agent SS? There's a long time to figure this stuff out. We're not going to be good next year either. We probably have 2 years to figure out SS.

Posted by: PAskinsfan17 | August 12, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

I thought it would be interesting to compare Desmond's offense to other NL SSs. OPS, high to low - sometimes 2 SSs listed for a team if both played a lot, sometimes the main guy is currently on the DL but I listed him:

Tulowitzki COL .887
Furcal LA .872
Ramirez Fla .808
Castro Chi .804
Uribe SF .766
Drew Ari .756
Gonzalez Atl .753
Reyes NYM .727
Rollins Phi .720
Renteria SF .706
Desmond Was .704
Sanchez Hou .697
Cedeno Pit .656
Escobar Mil .649
Cabrera Cin .641
Tejada SD .625
Ryan StL .579
Cabrera SD .559

My feelings about Desmond were borne out by these numbers - not great, not horrible. Seems to me that we have to view his offense and defense in exactly the same way - he's shown some potential, but huge gaps in his performance. I too think he should get another year to see if he can be a starting shortstop on a good team.

Posted by: utec | August 12, 2010 12:34 PM | Report abuse

On moving him to the outfield - he doesn't have the bat for corner outfield, but CFs generally are below-average hitters, almost as bad as shortstops, often worse than second basemen. IF (and it's a true "if") he can play solid center and learn to take more pitches, he can be productive.

Posted by: 202character | August 12, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse

"Who cares if Ian Desmond is booting balls at SS? We're in the basement and we're not getting out."

Coincidence? I think not.

Posted by: Sec3mysofa | August 12, 2010 1:04 PM | Report abuse

His mental errors frusutrate me, particularly the throws when he has no chance at the runner.

That said, I think it's a non-issue for another year. He's gonna be playing shortstop here, we don't really have much else for good options, and in the big scheme of things, this is not a high enough priority to go hunting for a free agent. We got bigger fish to fry.

However, if at some point Desmond was moved to centerfield, I'd be both fairly optimistic and excited. He's an athlete through and through, and he might be an exellent centerfielder.

Posted by: Sunderland | August 12, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Thank you to everyone that countered the nonsense of JohnRDC, who constantly spouts his knee-jerk, uninformed thoughts.

I agree with PAskinsfan- DC fans are impatient and generally seem to lack baseball literacy, with a few exceptions. I constantly read comments insisting that fans boycott the Nationals until they field a winning team- then complaining that the owners are cheap- LOL!!! That’s hypocrisy for you, if not a great catch-22.

To those that suggest Desmond moves to another position, consider that Davey Johnson, a HOF infielder, a manager that took the Baltimore to their ONLY playoff appearances under Angelos, and a baseball lifer, considers Desmond to be a prototypical shortstop and, in his own words, “not a utility man.”

I doubt any of you can evaluate talent better than Kasten, who has a decade of division titles with ATL, Rizzo, and Johnson.

Posted by: jboogie1 | August 12, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

>I doubt any of you can evaluate talent better than Kasten, who has a decade of division titles with ATL, Rizzo, and Johnson.
Posted by: jboogie1

They're not evaluating talent, they're trying to save the head scheister some money. So you're wrong on all fronts. But thanks for playing.

Posted by: Brue | August 12, 2010 4:43 PM | Report abuse

>I constantly read comments insisting that fans boycott the Nationals until they field a winning team- then complaining that the owners are cheap- LOL!!! That’s hypocrisy for you, if not a great catch-22.

Taking shots at Washington fans. How novel. 3 billion dollars up front can buy a lot of nachos. And that ain't got nothing to do with attendance.

Posted by: Brue | August 12, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

boogie:

I may be spouting nonsense, as you contend, but God, it's fun, and with the Nats it's "rip and read." Kasten, Rizzo and Riggleman provide too much fodder just to let their "defining moments" go by without a comment or two.

With regard to Desmond compared to Jeter, Yunt, etc. I wonder if those guys also were raging egomaniacs as rookies who took it upon themselves to comment on TV after the game on how well the team played that evening? Or were they seen but not heard the way rookies usually are? Among other things, we've got a swelled-head case in Desmond, I'm afraid.

Posted by: JohnRDC | August 12, 2010 5:30 PM | Report abuse


boogie:

Davey Johnson was a fine Orioles infielder -- and he once cracked 43 homers for the Braves -- but he's not a Hall of Famer.

Posted by: Drew8 | August 12, 2010 7:40 PM | Report abuse

Taking shots at Washington fans. How novel. 3 billion dollars up front can buy a lot of nachos. And that ain't got nothing to do with attendance.

Posted by: Brue | August 12, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

All of the "big market" teams have profitable TV networks (because fans watch their games) and they sell out their tickets when the 4th starter is on the mound and their team is mediocre or bad.

I've spent some time in Chicago and I currently live in New England. They also are highly critical of their team's management. In Wrigleyville, you find signs calling for a boycott of the Chicago Tribune, which owns the Cubs. HOWEVER, they understand the game and do not show up only when their team is winning, or when Strasburg pitches. Also, their local news outlets actually report the day-to-day happenings of their teams while DC news stations saturate their content with updates on Haynesworth's conditioning test.

In DC, seats that cost $10 would cost $100 in Fenway, Wrigley, or Yankee Stadium. I see a LOT of empty seats in Nats Park. We complained for so many years about losing baseball, now nobody seems to notice its return. But who cares? There's inconsequential Redskins-related tabloid reports out there!

Posted by: jboogie1 | August 12, 2010 10:02 PM | Report abuse

Taking shots at Washington fans. How novel. 3 billion dollars up front can buy a lot of nachos. And that ain't got nothing to do with attendance.

Posted by: Brue | August 12, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

All of the "big market" teams have profitable TV networks (because fans watch their games) and they sell out their tickets when the 4th starter is on the mound and their team is mediocre or bad.

I've spent some time in Chicago and I currently live in New England. They also are highly critical of their team's management. In Wrigleyville, you find signs calling for a boycott of the Chicago Tribune, which owns the Cubs. HOWEVER, they understand the game and do not show up only when their team is winning, or when Strasburg pitches. Also, their local news outlets actually report the day-to-day happenings of their teams while DC news stations saturate their content with updates on Haynesworth's conditioning test.

In DC, seats that cost $10 would cost $100 in Fenway, Wrigley, or Yankee Stadium. I see a LOT of empty seats in Nats Park. We complained for so many years about losing baseball, now nobody seems to notice its return. But who cares? There's inconsequential Redskins-related tabloid reports out there!

Posted by: jboogie1 | August 12, 2010 10:02 PM | Report abuse

Taking shots at Washington fans. How novel. 3 billion dollars up front can buy a lot of nachos. And that ain't got nothing to do with attendance.

Posted by: Brue | August 12, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

All of the "big market" teams have profitable TV networks (because fans watch their games) and they sell out their tickets when the 4th starter is on the mound and their team is mediocre or bad.

I've spent some time in Chicago and I currently live in New England. They also are highly critical of their team's management. In Wrigleyville, you find signs calling for a boycott of the Chicago Tribune, which owns the Cubs. HOWEVER, they understand the game and do not show up only when their team is winning, or when Strasburg pitches. Also, their local news outlets actually report the day-to-day happenings of their teams while DC news stations saturate their content with updates on Haynesworth's conditioning test.

In DC, seats that cost $10 would cost $100 in Fenway, Wrigley, or Yankee Stadium. I see a LOT of empty seats in Nats Park. We complained for so many years about losing baseball, now nobody seems to notice its return. But who cares? There's inconsequential Redskins-related tabloid reports out there!

Posted by: jboogie1 | August 12, 2010 10:05 PM | Report abuse

Taking shots at Washington fans. How novel. 3 billion dollars up front can buy a lot of nachos. And that ain't got nothing to do with attendance.

Posted by: Brue | August 12, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

All of the "big market" teams have profitable TV networks (because fans watch their games) and they sell out their tickets when the 4th starter is on the mound and their team is mediocre or bad.

I've spent some time in Chicago and I currently live in New England. They also are highly critical of their team's management. In Wrigleyville, you find signs calling for a boycott of the Chicago Tribune, which owns the Cubs. HOWEVER, they understand the game and do not show up only when their team is winning, or when Strasburg pitches. Also, their local news outlets actually report the day-to-day happenings of their teams while DC news stations saturate their content with updates on Haynesworth's conditioning test.

In DC, seats that cost $10 would cost $100 in Fenway, Wrigley, or Yankee Stadium. I see a LOT of empty seats in Nats Park. We complained for so many years about losing baseball, now nobody seems to notice its return. But who cares? There's inconsequential Redskins-related tabloid reports out there!

Posted by: jboogie1 | August 12, 2010 10:07 PM | Report abuse

Taking shots at Washington fans. How novel. 3 billion dollars up front can buy a lot of nachos. And that ain't got nothing to do with attendance.

Posted by: Brue | August 12, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

All of the "big market" teams have profitable TV networks (because fans watch their games) and they sell out their tickets when the 4th starter is on the mound and their team is mediocre or bad.

I've spent some time in Chicago and I currently live in New England. They also are highly critical of their team's management. In Wrigleyville, you find signs calling for a boycott of the Chicago Tribune, which owns the Cubs. HOWEVER, they understand the game and do not show up only when their team is winning, or when Strasburg pitches. Also, their local news outlets actually report the day-to-day happenings of their teams while DC news stations saturate their content with updates on Haynesworth's conditioning test.

In DC, seats that cost $10 would cost $100 in Fenway, Wrigley, or Yankee Stadium. I see a LOT of empty seats in Nats Park. We complained for so many years about losing baseball, now nobody seems to notice its return. But who cares? There's inconsequential Redskins-related tabloid reports out there!

Posted by: jboogie1 | August 12, 2010 10:08 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company