rant off. sorry.

Can’t argue with the K angle, absolutely. Here’s an interesting fact; here’s the number of Nats strikeouts in the 5 game NLDS.
- Game 1: 13 Ks
- Game 2: 11 Ks
- Game 3: 5 K’s
- Game 4: 6 Ks
- Game 5: 11 Ks
Total of 46 Ks in 5 games, or 132 outs (they “missed” 3 outs in game 4) That’s 34.8%. 34.8% of the time against a good rotation they struck out. Which is about on a par of what they did on the season (roughly assuming 27 outs per 81 games, which isn’t entirely true b/c the team didn’t get all 3 outs in the home frame of any home win), 1325/4374 = about 30% of outs on the season by virtue of Ks. We weren’t the worst in the league but we were close. Espinosa is the main culpret of course, and Harper should lower his K rate his 2nd time through a full season, but then again, baseball logic says that you put up with more Ks if you have a player with home-run power. And the Nats basically field an entire lineup (save the Catcher) of guys who either have or did hit 20+ homers. Its sort of something we may be stuck with.

For me, roster construction is about choices. Yes, Span makes the outfield better, gives us a high OBP guy at the top of the order. That’s great. But at what cost? At the cost of our best/most advanced starting pitching prospect. So you ask; is it better to have a center fielder or is it better to have an upper-end prospect who may be ready in a year or two? We could have gotten by with Harper in CF, saved the pick and then maybe perhaps in two years instead of paying a FA 4th starter $11-$13M on a one-year deal we’re paying a hot-shot prospect $490k to get nearly the same production and we’re spending that $13M on another need. Maybe Rizzo was ok parting with Meyers because internally the team doesn’t think he can stick as a starter, and therefore a starting CF with greater than 100 OPS+ for his career and plus-plus defense always outweighs just another right handed relief pitcher. I can buy that argument ….. but only if Meyers washes out as a starter.

While Harper did very well in CF last year, the team was adamant about saving wear and tear on him by moving him into a corner position. When the trade was made, my first thought was “goodbye, Adam – thanks for 2012.” The trade really makes sense if they pocket the draft pick for LaRoche (he’s going to play somewhere in 2013), play Morse at 1b for one year and then move Moore, Rendon or Lombardozzi into the infield depending on development and where the needs are. I do agree that if they bring back LaRoche the trade makes less sense, but still may well be a net positive. Even with Morse at 1b I like their defense a lot. They were already very successful at turning batted balls into outs last year (the best measure of defense IMHO), finishing 5th in MLB and 1st in the NL in that measure according to Baseball Prospectus. That should improve in 2013.

Btw, i’ve gone on record several times that I *hated* the Willingham trade in the first place You don’t need a track star to play left field. Goes back to my “why did we need Span” argument. I just don’t believe there’s that many defensive runs to be saved by having Willie Mays manning left field for most normal teams.

If you know you’re signing LaRoche, then you ask all parties to hold off on putting pen to paper, start calling around to teams that could use Morse (two leading candidates being Seattle and Tampa) and make that deal, before anybody knows you’ve signed LaRoche.

But as I think more about this, the Nats should sign ALR and keep Morse. First, they are going for it now, and Morse’s salary isn’t a budget- buster. This would be very similar to keeping Lannan last year. Second, Morse’s positional flexibility (along with Harper’s) provides a hedge against 4 positions of injury, all manned by people with injury histories (ok, maybe not Harper). Third, Morse can have the DH slot in something like 15-20 inter league games. Fourth, he’d be a great PH. fifth, I don’t think we will get very much back in a trade for Morse. One year of a poor fielding good bat doesn’t bring back a lot in this market (see, Willingham, Josh).

Tyler Moore probably gets bumped to AAA in this scenario, and Morse is probably least happy in this scenario, which might seem unfair to them. but I think it gives us unquestionably our strongest roster, and Rizzo should be trying to give us the best chance to win within budget constraints.

I guess it goes more towards my beef with the Span trade. We didn’t NEED Span; could have gotten along just fine with Harper in CF. Without Span, nobody slides to left to take Morse’s spot and he’s got a position in 2013. Which is a better hitting team: Span/Harper/Werth/LaRoche or Morse/Harper/Werth/LaRoche? Or, for sake of argument since LaRoche still may not sign: Span/Harper/Werth/Morse?

Todd, I’m not sure I agree that Morse must be pissed about this. He had to see this as a possibility. He’s a minus defensive outfielder on a team that values defense, and there’s a logjam at 1B. Morse would also probably agree that ALR is a better defender and a team leader. And it’s a shame that this is playing out in the media, but hot stove rumors are all that baseball writers have to print right now. The Nats aren’t creating these stories; the press is. I doubt that Morse takes any of this as a compliment, as Boswell wrote, but I doubt he’s mad at the team, either.

But ALR gives the Nats arguably the best infield defense in baseball (maybe Tampa with Escobar and Loney added), and I like good defense.

I would hold firm at 2 years for Laroche (and I assume it would be close to $25m).

Not disagreeing that Werth makes MORE sense batting 2nd. Again, reading tea leaves it seems like the team wants to return him to a RBI slot in the lineup. I guess its the difference between saying what I (or you) think the team should do versus trying to interpret what we think is going to happen.

I think in the abstract locking up a chunk of payroll to LaRoche leads the team further towards the Yankee/Phillie model of having aging guys on larger salaries hamstringing your budget. What’s the cardinal rule of maintaining roster/payroll flexibility? Avoid massive contracts for decline years for sluggers. And that seems to be the definition of a 3 year deal for LaRoche. (ok, maybe not the “massive” part, but still). This team is already going to have to make some serious decisions once Strasburg and Harper hit arbitration, and you can only have so many $15-$20m players and still be competitive. Unless you’re the Dodgers.

Morse vs. RHP: .292/.343/.487
LaRoche vs. RHP: .274/.348/.495

That’s not a whole lot of difference, even if you assume that LaRoche carries his numbers forward as he ages into his mid 30’s.

As for lineup, I think Werth bats #2 behind Span, getting two OBP guys up at the top of the order ahead of the thumpers. If LaRoche resigns, then the lineup goes Span/Werth/Harper/Zimmerman/LaRoche/Desmond through the top six spots (LRLRLR), and if LaRoche goes, then the lineup goes Span/Werth/Zimmerman/Harper/Morse/Desmond. If Espinosa figures it out and Ramos is 100%, I like the Nats 1-8 spots a LOT (1-9 when Strasburg or Zimmermann are on the hill .