Nationals Arm Race

"… the reason you win or lose is darn near always the same – pitching.” — Earl Weaver

Why no Qualifying Offer for Edwin Jackson?

31 comments

Edwin Jackson seems destined for another organization in 2013. Photo AP via wjla.com

Buster Olney just asked the same question that i’ve been wondering; why didn’t the Nats extend a Qualifying Offer to FA to be Edwin Jackson?

They paid him $11m in 2012; a qualifying offer for 2013 would have been $13.3M, a decent raise from the $11M Jackson made this year.  But, in a weaker FA market for starters this off-season, Jackson seems almost certain to get a 3 or 4 year deal at or near his 2012 salary in AAV.  He’s healthy, he’s dependable and he’s durable, even if he’s not a #1 or #2 starter.

Perhaps the team was worried that Jackson, having lived on year-to-year deals and seemingly comfortable gambling his long-term financial future by accepting these one-year deals (seemingly a product of his itinerant, military-family upbringing), would have just taken them up on the $13.3M offer (it representing a nice raise from 2012′s $11M) and suddenly the Nats would be “stuck” with a guy they didn’t want back.  That’s the only way to read the lack of an Q.O. extension.

Otherwise the lack of the offer makes no sense; if you think Jackson is searching for a multi-year deal, and if it seems certain that he’ll find it in a weak market, then the Q.O. guarantees a supplemental first round pick for the team.

Written by Todd Boss

November 5th, 2012 at 2:27 pm

31 Responses to 'Why no Qualifying Offer for Edwin Jackson?'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Why no Qualifying Offer for Edwin Jackson?'.

  1. 1. If Jackson couldn’t get an acceptable multi-year deal last year, I’m not sure why you would say it “seems certain” this year. Seems like his results this year were consistent with his previous years at best.
    2. Last year they said they were mostly signing him to fill the innings gaps resulting from the shutdown of SS. While this might actually be worse this year, since they can’t be counting on CMW for innings, I could certainly see them wanting to have more flexibility going through the offseason than would result if EJax did happen to accept the offer.

    Dave

    5 Nov 12 at 3:09 pm

  2. I think he got a 3 year deal last year (believe it was 3yr deal) from Pittsburgh but for less AAV than what he got from Washington. He chose shorter term higher pay versus longer term more guaranteed money. I think its more certain this coming off-season because there’s just nobody out there. Last year Jackson languished and sat on the FA market til nearly spring training. This year he’s ranked 4th or 5th best FA pitcher on most of the pundit lists i’ve seen (after Greinke, Sanchez and maybe Lohse). And there’s a ton of FA money out there to be spent. And there’s plenty of teams looking for starters. I think all of those reasons add up to “certain” that he’ll get a multi-year offer.

    I don’t recall Jackson’s signing last year as being spun the way you describe. You don’t get an $11M pitcher to “fill innings.” I think he was bought to be the 4th starter behind our big 3 guys, and that’s what he ended up doing. You didn’t need innings fill-in gap for Strasburg til mid september; if anything signing Wang for one last hurrah was for that purpose. Expensive, but that’s why.

    No argument about wanting flexibility, clearly. The team really must have thought that he’d snap up the 1yr tender offer.

    Todd Boss

    5 Nov 12 at 3:27 pm

  3. Jackson did receive multiple offers for more than 1 year last offseason. He turned them down to get the higher annual value and a better chance at winning. This offseason, as Todd pointed out, there are more teams hunting pitchers with more money to spend so I would almost be certain Edwin would get a 3 year deal in the 33 to 36 million dollar range.

    He did however say he was very happy with the Nationals and wanted to stay put if possible and a $13.3 million salary could have been enough incentive for him to accept and shoot for a career year in 2013 to boost him towards the top of next offseason’s market.

    It makes me wonder if Rizzo has something else up his sleeve. If all he was looking for is a 4th or 5th starter to fill the last slot he would have definitely extended the offer because there really isn’t much difference between EJax and several of the other starters on the market. Maybe Rizzo is gunning for a bigger name via trade of maybe he still has his sights set on Greinke.

    PDowdy

    5 Nov 12 at 4:35 pm

  4. That’s what I think; I think Jackson bucks the Conventional Wisdom trend in the game and is not afraid of a series of 1 year deals. Most other guys would want the longer contract with larger guaranteed money.

    I think Rizzo has something up his sleeve. He loves doing business with Oakland (Rizzo’s made 3 significant trades with Oakland in the last 2 years) and Oakland has a ton of starting ptiching. Lots of people focusing on Tampa’s starters (especially Sheilds and Hellckson) but I think Oakland’s starters are in play. Imagine someone like a Brett Anderson was in play?

    Greinke: not that Rizzo isn’t afraid to spend money (Werth) but chasing Greinke doesn’t seem like its a good idea. Too many other teams out there will be pushing FA prices way up. I wouldn’t mind seeing a lower-profile starter like Marcum or Dempster on a short term deal until our starter prospects (Meyer, Karns, Solis especially) matriculate and start pushing for that 5th starter spot themselves.

    Todd Boss

    5 Nov 12 at 4:45 pm

  5. Brett Anderson is a nice name to watch. I was also looking at Jerry Blevins in Oakland as a potential trade target. He had a good season but Oakland may be willing to trade him since he is arb eligible. The Nats will need a lefty reliever and committing big bucks to Burnett or Affeldt seems unwise to me.

    I don’t like the idea of Greinke either but Rizzo sure seems to like him. I hope he isn’t in the fold. He is a solid number 2 or 3 starter but he doesn’t deserve the contract he is going to get this offseason.

    I would love to see a move to bring in Marcum, Dempster or someone like that. If the team can stock up a starter in AAA, ala Duke and Lannan last season, I would love for them to go hard (reasonably of course) after Brandon McCarthy.

    PDowdy

    5 Nov 12 at 5:01 pm

  6. He was your basic innings eater who never did any good in high leverage situations.
    People forget that although he’s touted as World Series Winner for the Cards, he pitched once in the Division Series and was so bad they didn’t let him near the mound again in the LCS or World Series.

    With all the kids in the rotation, it would have been nice to show that as a veteran he could step up when they needed him to. But he didn’t, simple as that.

    Mark L

    5 Nov 12 at 6:39 pm

  7. It is puzzling to me when people say that they don’t like Greinke. He has basically been a 5 WAR pitcher for the last 5 seasons (that is essentially Gio’s season), he is in his prime and he has been remarkably durable (at least, if you can keep him off the basketball court). He has excellent control, an increasing GB% and pretty good strikeout rates. If you gave him a 6 year deal, he ends that contract at Kyle Lohse’s current age.

    The Nats have $25m per year coming because of the new MLB TV contract, $30-60m per year more when the MASN dispute is settled, reasonable expectations of growing attendance and merchandising revenues, and an excellent 3-5 window with controllable players. Doesn’t Greinke fit perfectly into that? Isn’t he a great hedge against a Stras injury or a Gio regression?

    It must be either that people don’t agree that WAR does a good job measuring value, or they are still turned off by Greinke’s snub of the potential trade. But from where I am sitting, this is the thing I am rooting for most. I think that we would scare the hell out of everyone else in the league.

    Wally

    5 Nov 12 at 7:58 pm

  8. I think this is clearly a courtesy to Jackson and Boras. If they extended the qualifying offer it would inhibit other teams from making offers with the “penalty” of losing the draft pick. Most teams that would look to sign someone like Jackson would not be in the protected range and with the growing emphasis on keeping and using draft picks, the loss of a draft pick might be enough to drive suitors away – just as has been discussed if the Nats sign Bourn. This way they can let Jackson explore all possible contract options and then if nothing good comes up maybe they re-sign him anyways. Probably not likely though, if someone else like Haren comes through. I agree the years and money make Greinke unattractive and shorter term options are better. The trade route (Anderson would be great) is interesting unless it further depletes minor league talent – if LaRoche signs maybe Morse, +/- Lannan, +/- Lombo make up a package that can bring in another starter. However, it raises the same issue as Greinke – years and dollars. If you want to commit to that route and work out the salaries later, I would go for Greinke over the trades.

    Mark

    5 Nov 12 at 8:49 pm

  9. Edwin Jackson FIRED Scott Boras. He was clearly miffed at something that went down last season, and I would surmise that it was Boras dictating where Jackson signed. He could have accepted a three year deal that was offered, but Boras probably insisted he could do better in 2012, when there were less quality SPs available. There’s an argument to be made there, but it’s a risky proposition that happened to work out well for the Nats, but for Jackson it’s not the most prudent approach.

    Either way, Jackson will be taking a multi-year deal. He signed with a smaller agent, who’s definitely going to take the most years, which will also mean the most total money.

    I agree, it was silly for the Nats not to make an QO for Jackson. They’re going to spending much more for Greinke, and probably like $10-12m for Lohse or Sanchez, but for 2+ years.

    Will

    6 Nov 12 at 5:06 am

  10. In fact, this article from July says it all: “Jackson changes agents, wants long-term deal”

    http://www.csnwashington.com/baseball-washington-nationals/talk/jackson-changes-agents-wants-long-term-deal

    Will

    6 Nov 12 at 5:07 am

  11. I’ll give you my 2 cents on why I don’t think Greinke is a worthy target: I think he’s overrated. He has one unbelievable season in KC in 2009, then is basically league average for 2 seasons after that (ERA+s of 100 and 103 in 2010 and 2011). He had a great record in Los Angeles … but was again just slightly over league average in terms of his ERA+ figures. Aces post consistently solid seasons, year after year. Verlander, Hernandez, Sabathia, Strasburg. Greinke has had one fantastic season and a bunch of ho-hum seasons. I don’t want to commit 9 figures to that kind of pitcher. Perhaps this is slightly too much emphasis on ERA+, but I like that stat more than WAR (which I consider a “counting” stat that favors guys who are healthy and rack up Ks but who also get hit).

    Todd Boss

    6 Nov 12 at 8:51 am

  12. I’ll tell you who else I like from the Oakland camp; McCarthy. He’s a FA, coming off that scary injury and could be signed for a reasonable amount. But, then again what i’ve read about him seems to indicate that he’ll re-sign in Oakland. I wrote a post on Oakland’s starter depth back mid-season (http://www.nationalsarmrace.com/?p=4316), but it bears repeating; they STILL have an amazing amount of starter depth despite all the trades they made last off-season.

    Todd Boss

    6 Nov 12 at 9:07 am

  13. I’m in agreement with Todd and PDowdy on Greinke. It isn’t that he’s bad; he’s actually a solid pitcher (though he gets way too much hype for his one exceptional season three years ago). But he’s at maximum value right now, meaning that you’d have to commit a ton of money to get him, and that’s money that would then be unavailable to extend Z’mann, Strasburg, Harper, Detwiler, Desmond, etc. No one player is worth that. A mid-market franchise can afford maybe one overpaid star, and the Nats already have one in Jayson Werth (a valuable veteran and clubhouse guy, but certainly not worth $126M). I’ve also read that Greinke is not a team-first type of player–rather, he’s kind of a moody jerk–but that’s not as much of a factor for me as the dollars.

    So, in summary, Greinke is a good pitcher, but not worth the dollars it would take to sign him. That money is best spent elsewhere. A guy like Lohse would cost less for less years, but I still haven’t formed a final opinion about which starting pitcher we should pursue. Heck, I’m still trying to form a final opinion about the LaRoche/Morse/Moore logjam at 1B.

    clark17

    6 Nov 12 at 10:05 am

  14. The more I look at the FA market, the more i’m thinking that the team is going to move assets to get a 5th starter.

    You can make the argument that
    - the team has an “extra” middle infielder in Espinosa who can and should be playing short somewhere.
    - Tyler Moore is worth taking a starting gamble on at the expense of Michael Morse (or vice versa).
    - the Nats have two closer-quality arms in Clippard and Storen, and only need one.
    - The team has an extra MLB quality backup catcher in Flores
    - the bullpen has one too many RH arms (Clippard, Storen, Mattheus, Stammen, Garcia and Henry Rodriguez)

    Somewhere in that collection of players we should be able to find a starter in trade.

    Todd Boss

    6 Nov 12 at 10:47 am

  15. Do you think Espy can bring back Jarrod Parker? My guess is that we need to add more, like Solis.

    Wally

    6 Nov 12 at 12:04 pm

  16. Espinosa would definitely be an intriguing piece for Oakland who is in need of young/cheap shortstop help.

    PDowdy

    6 Nov 12 at 2:09 pm

  17. I think the Nats would need to throw in a lot more to get Parker. He’s only 23, under club control for 5 (maybe 6) more years? That’d take a significantly higher haul. I also don’t think Espinosa’s value is that high in the eyes of other teams right now. If he were sold as a SS maybe so. But his production at 2B is low compared to his compatriots. Question is, would Oakland view him as a SS?

    Todd Boss

    6 Nov 12 at 3:11 pm

  18. I meant it as a SS. If we’re ‘selling’ the idea, he is an above average defensive SS with pop and 4 years of control. If the A’s don’t buy him at SS, there is no chance. Even if they do, we probably have to throw in another piece like Perez.

    But I think Rizzo is a guy that shoots high when he goes for pitching.

    Wally

    6 Nov 12 at 7:07 pm

  19. Someone asked Keith Law if he thought Michael Morse+a prospect would get James Shields in trade from tampa and he scoffed. Maybe that was more about Morse’s perceived ability or Tampa’s trade demands for its players (which is obviously high; they’ve had BJ Upton on the blocks for years) than it was about trying to find trade value. But, going back to Oakland, is James Shields considered the equal of a Jarrod Parker in terms of trade, at least to the Athletics? Beane is clearly more of a wheeler-and-dealer than Freidman so its easier to make a move. But Beane also wants more bodies.

    I’d guess it takes Espinosa, plus a closer to the majors guy like a Perez or a Walters (depending on Oakland’s needs), plus the best young pitching prospect we have (the new equivalent to AJ Cole) in low- or high-A to get Parker. Someone like perhaps a Robbie Ray, a guy who may or may not blossom but also continues to add to Oakland’s pipeline of generated arms.

    Todd Boss

    7 Nov 12 at 10:02 am

  20. I was thinking more along the lines of targetting Brett Anderson with Espinosa as the bait. Parker is going to cost a TON and there is absolutely no reason for Oakland to move him for another 2 years.

    The other team worth looking at may be Arizona. Yes they traded for Cliff Pennington but he profiles more as a utility guy than an every day shortstop. They have a lot of pitching deptch as well in Cahill, Corbin, Collmenter, Kennedy, Skaggs, Miley, Bauer and Hudson. This is speculation but they may be interested in moving a guy like Cahill, Kennedy or Hudson to free up some payroll flexibility and to make room for Skaggs and Bauer. A guy like Cahill could be a very nice fit in the back of our rotation. He has proven durable and his K rate has increased every season. He is also under team control with a friendly contract through 2015 with options for ’16 and ’17 so he may be harder to pry away than Kennedy. Kennedy is a Boras client and is just entering his arbitration years so he may be more expensive than the DBacks want to deal with. He is durable (624.1 innings in 3 years) and strikes out guys at a good clip (7.9 K/9 career) while limiting walks fairly well (2.9 BB/9).

    After looking at starting pitchers around the league I think a move for Ian Kennedy or Trevor Cahill would be a great idea for the team. Brett Anderson would also be nice but his injury history scares the crap out of me.

    PDowdy

    7 Nov 12 at 10:02 am

  21. Another target I might consider is Gavin Floyd of the White Sox. He fits the role of a 5th starter but is probably more of 4th starter talent wise. Now that Rick Hahn is the GM Rizzo may not have to deal with Ken Williams (Who knows if there is really bad blood from the Adam Dunn trade talks a few years ago or not). Floyd wouldn’t cost nearly as much as a Parker, Kennedy or Cahill in a trade.

    PDowdy

    7 Nov 12 at 10:06 am

  22. Eh; Floyd doesn’t impress me. He’s essentially John Lannan career wise. I’d rather go to arbitration with Lannan than pay Floyd 9.5M in 2013. Besides, i think the WS need to hold on to Floyd frankly. Danks and Liriano were so bad this year, Floyd looks like he may line up as their #3 or #4. Plus, I think Chris Sale is an arm injury waiting to happen You can claim the Verducci effect isn’t real, but a 23 yr old nearly tripling his innings from 2011 to 2012 spells trouble to me. If all these guys sputter out of the gate they’ll need Floyd.

    Have you seen something that indicates that Floyd is on the block?

    Todd Boss

    7 Nov 12 at 10:45 am

  23. You could go after Anderson and roll the dice with injury history. Same with McCarthy, and he’s a FA so you wouldn’t have to give up any more prospects.

    I like what you’re thinking with Arizona; plus Rizzo has a good history of trading with them. Rizzo’s former hunting grounds so he’s familiar with the organizational philosophy towards pitcher development. The question is, do we have enough in trade to acquire one of these guys?

    Todd Boss

    7 Nov 12 at 10:53 am

  24. After the Peavey signing I saw a comment from the White Sox GM, Hahn, about expecting to be a popular team with regaurds to other organizations inquiring on the White Sox starters. I can’t remember which National writers it was but 2 of them pegged Floyd as the prime trade candidate since he is in his walk year and people are still under the impression he will hit his potential finally.

    If I had my choice of Brett Anderson in a trade or McCarthy on a 1 or 2 year deal I vote McCarthy. If the team was willing to waste 7 or 8 mil on CMW over the last few years I don’t think they would have a problem making a go at either pitcher simply for this high upside both possess.

    Arizona still needs a SS in my opinion and I think they were in the market for relief help. Maybe a package of Espinosa/Clippard/prospect for a guy like Cahill or Kennedy? Maybe that is too steep but I just feel like Clippard is on a path to a blow out next year. He has been used so often over the last 3 years he scares me as a long term investment. Maybe I am valuing Clipp and Espinosa too highly but I also view Kennedy as a good starter but he is inconsistent and a Scott Boras client so there won’t be a team friendly extension in his near future. If a team has a chance of working one out though it could be the Nationals. That type of trade would fill 2 needs at the major league level for the DBacks and may be tough to pass up.

    PDowdy

    7 Nov 12 at 2:44 pm

  25. I just scanned through Dave Cameron’s fangraphs chat, and someone was peppering him about Michael Morse potential trades (mostly focusing on getting David Price). Cameron has always been rather negative when it comes to the Nats/Strasburg/etc but seemed especially of the opinion that Morse and guys like Espinosa and Lombardozzi have little trade value. So, perhaps we’re over-valuing these guys. If i’m being cynical: Morse had a down year, Espinosa strikes out too much, Lombardozzi is a utility player, and Clippard imploded in August. Even Storen has warts; elbow surgery and the NLDS meltdown. None of these guys really flourished this year frankly; they all cost themselves value versus what they did in 2011.

    If this is how other teams evaluate these guys, we may be in for a rude awakening when calling up other teams to offer trades.

    Todd Boss

    7 Nov 12 at 4:26 pm

  26. Cameron, in my opinion, is negative on more people than he is positive. I take most of his writing with a grain of salt. I agree with your evaluations of Clippard and Lombo. I think Danny still has a good amount of trade value. Even with the strikeout issues he has 20/20 potential every year. He also proved he can handle SS this year. His glove is excellent and so is his arm. It is hard to find a 3.5 WAR middle infielder who is controllable and only 25. It makes me second guess on the idea of trading him honestly. He can be frustrating to watch but so was Desmond for awhile.

    Morse did have a “down year” but that is more injury related than anything. I think his 2011 season is an aberation and not the norm. I think you are looking at a guy who has power but not 30 homer a year power. With that said though I still view him as a .285/.340/.500 slash line with 25 homers at a pretty good salary for a year since he is only going to make $6.75m this year. There are a lot of teams looking for offense out there so I would assume his trade value is higher than Cameron would suggest. Especially if an AL team gets involved for him. He provides versatility of being able to play 1B, LF and DH in the AL.

    Storen’s meltdown in the playoffs doesn’t seem like it would effect his trade value. He was lights out the game before. He also was barely missing on a lot of his pitches in that inning. Yes he does have the elbow surgery issue but it wasn’t as big of a surgery as a lot of other pitchers so I don’t think that pushes his value down. Oddly enough the surgery itself may have pushed Storen’s value up. He now will earn far less through arbitration this season than he would have if he had racked up all of the saves for the Nats this year. I saw on MLBtraderumors where he is projected at $1.7m this year. You would have to imagine if he had a 35+ save season he would have been in line for a salary in the $3 m range this year. Knocking off almost half of his salary costs him a lot of money this season and throughout the rest of his arbitration process which makes him more tradeable.

    I would say that while we may over value some of our guys the trade targets we have mentioned aren’t exactly of the David Price caliber. I’m not suggesting we need to acquire another ace and neither are you so I think we are still being pretty reasonable in our thought process.

    PDowdy

    7 Nov 12 at 4:57 pm

  27. If the team was 3-years patient with Desmond (remember how we all felt about him at the end of last season?), then it really implies that the team plans to let Espinosa get his 3rd year starting in order to improve on his weaknesses. He hits with enough extra base power in terms of doubles and homers to propel him to a 94 OPS+ this past season despite his Ks and low batting average.

    I honestly think Storen’s mlbtraderumors salary estimate is going to be way low. Chad Cordero got a $4.6M award first year eligible, as a comparison point. I’m not saying Storen has pitched as well as Cordero did in 05 and 06, but he wasn’t that far off in his 2011 performance. I still think he’s getting somewhere north of $1.7m.

    All in all, I’m not confident in being able to pull off a trade with Tampa. They’ve always proven to be highly demanding of prospects and we’re drained. We’re far more likely to pull off a deal for one of Oakland’s or Arizona’s starters.

    Todd Boss

    8 Nov 12 at 9:32 am

  28. I agree about mlbtraderumors estimate being low. That would be paying Storen like Clippard was and Clipp didn’t have the saves. I wouldn’t be shocked if he is in the $2.5 million range. Even still that is lower than he would have gotten without the surgery. If he had been closer all year he would have gotten the same money, or higher, that Cordero got.

    I agree about Tampa. I see Arizona and Oakland as our best trade partners. Also possibly Cleveland if they make Masteron available. After seeing Rizzo’s comments yesterday though I wouldn’t be that shocked if they go quite hard after Greinke or Sanchez. They only cost money, which with the changes in the drafting process the team has more to put into free agency, and either would give the Nationals the best rotation in baseball for sure.

    I know we both agree Greinke isn’t going to be worth his contract and that he has question marks makeup wise but one would have to think if you can slot him into a rotation behind Strasburg and Gio that he would have far less anxiety issues than being the focal point of a rotation and could thrive under those circumstances. Rizzo does tend to fixate on certain players when he wants them.

    PDowdy

    8 Nov 12 at 9:46 am

  29. I wonder if Rizzo may try to pull a deal with Arizona for a guy like Josh Collmenter and Kubel if LaRoche walks. That gives the team added pitching depth and a LFer with a left handed bat to replace LaRoche some of the time in the lineup. A Kubel/Moore platoon in LF with Morse at first base could still provide plenty of punch. Kubel career against RHP is a .279/.343/.498 slash line with 113 of his career 134 homers. He hits a homer every 19.8 at bats against righties.

    Collmenter could be that John Lannan type guy because he does have an option left as far as I can tell. Collmenter has added value that Lannan doesn’t though because he has pitched in relief and is far cheaper. If the team is serious about converting Garcia back to a starter (as Comak reported again last night) then having a guy like Collmenter to be the long man out of the pen or available in AAA in case of an injury would be a nice luxury. They could then pursue a pitcher like Brandon McCarthy or Marcum with the understanding that they will likely get hurt at some point during the year but a capable back up is on the roster.

    I wonder what a trade like that would require since both Kubel and Collmenter don’t seem to be in the long term plan in Arizona. Any estimations?

    Just another thought, I would pursue Tim Stauffer on a minor league deal. Not sure how much longer he will be on the shelf but he could also be a nice AAA emergency depth pickup.

    PDowdy

    8 Nov 12 at 9:58 am

  30. Its really difficult to anticipate what Rizzo will do without knowing how much payroll will be allowed to increase. If you assumed that Payroll was staying about the same, then you could easily do some quick arithmetic:
    - Lannan/Wang and other minor FAs out saves $13M and roughly equates to the 7-8 arbitration case pay increases.
    - Jackson out saves $11M and roughly equates to the pay increases built into our Longer Term FA contracts (werth, Zim, Gio, Morse each increase by about $3m)
    - LaRoche out then gives the team about $8M to start with on the FA market all other things being equal.

    If you assumed that the team was allowed to inflate payroll to roughly $100M that’d be a dollar for dollar increase afforded to a major FA pitcher.

    But again, who knows what Lerners are telling Rizzo his budget is. Bumping him to $110M only puts him about 10th or so in the league but gives a ton of flexibility to go after a major name. Thing is, i’m hearing Greinke now is looking at “the largets contract ever for a right hander.” Do we really want to guarantee $25M/year to this guy? I do like Sanchez though; he always killed the Nats and knows the division, and clearly enjoyed a) getting out of the Zoo in Miami and b) playing for a winner. I’d take him in a heartbeat.

    Todd Boss

    8 Nov 12 at 10:36 am

  31. I’m split on Collmenter. I’m not sure he’s not just a gimmick pitcher with 2 pitches who will be figured out at some point. He got absolutely obliterated at the start of last season (I know primarily b/c I had him in fantasy, banking on a repeat of 2011) but then was sterling in relief before getting a few more spot starts at the end of the season. Do the Nats need a guy like this? Don’t they already have this in Stammen?

    I read the repeating of Garcia moving to starter as well. It can happen in an off-season (Chris Sale best latest example), so why not give it a shot? Garcia has options, so if he doesn’t win a 5th spot he can continue to toil in Syracuase along side Perry.

    Maybe we’re all over-thinking this 5th starter thing frankly; maybe the team completely plans on filling from within from either Perry or Garcia and plans on spending money to replace LaRoche.

    Todd Boss

    8 Nov 12 at 10:48 am

Leave a Reply