Nationals Arm Race

If you had to pick one player to start a team with ... you can't do much better than Tulowitzki. Photo unknown via facebook page.

With the Redskins losing games faster than the GOP loses presidential candidates, Tom Boswell did his weekly Monday chat on 11/21/11.  He did take a ton of baseball questions; here’s how I’d have answered them.

As always, questions are edited for clarity and I answer here prior to reading his.

Q: Boz, If you pick any current baseball player (assuming current ages) to start a team with who would it be?

A: Great question.  I’d probably go with a position player over a pitcher, just for risk’s sake.  Has to be a young, already productive player.  I’d focus on a marquee position that generally is difficult to fill.  I’d probably go with Troy Tulowitzki.  Also in the mix would be Matt Kemp, Ryan Braun, Jacoby Ellsbury, Evan Longoria, Felix Hernandez and Clayton Kershaw.  These are all guys who are in their mid-20s and who have already proven they are accomplished, MVP/Cy Young calibre players.  Boswell never answered.

Q: How is MLB going to come up with the 2013 schedule, with 15/15 team-league splits, constant interleague play and balanced opponents?

A: Who possibly knows.  I just did some quick calculations and there’s not really an easy answer coming:  Assuming a (more) balanced schedule:

• 6 home/6 away against 4 divisional rivals = 48 games.
• 3 home/3 away against 10 other league rivals = 60 games
• 3 home/3 away versus your “Natural Rival” = 6 games

That leaves 48 games to play. 48 games is 16 3-game series.  That doesn’t really work out too well for 15-team leagues.  Do you play every AL team once and double up somewhere?  Do you focus on playing a home/away series with each of a 5-team AL division on a rotating basis?  That would take away 10 of the 16 series but you still have 18 games to figure out.  And, what happens when your rotating division ends up being the same as your Natural rival?  Then you either play them as many times as you play your divisional rivals or you double up elsewhere.

Frankly, I think the unbalanced schedule needs to stay, if only to emphasize divisional rivalries.  If you increase divisional games to 9 home/9 away then you have 72 games accounted for intra-division.   Take away 60 regular season games intra-league and your 6-game set versus your “natural opponent” you’re left with exactly 24 games.  That’s 8 three-game series, which still isn’t an even number but could be handled with a team playing an entire AL division (splitting home and away) and parts of another.  I don’t know; there’s no real clean solution that makes itself evident.

Boswell also says he has no idea how the schedule will work.

Q: Better Pitcher for the Nats – Oswalt or Buerhle?

A: I’d rather have Oswalt frankly.  Buehrle may be an innings eater but Oswalt is a better pitcher, an “Ace” without question just within the last couple of seasons.  I don’t want a #3 starter; I want a guy to join my two best arms and give me something approaching a playoff rotation.  Caveat; I have to be sure Oswalt is healthy.  Does he have too many innings on that arm?  Is he recovered from his back injury?  The Nats are clearly favoring Buehrle right now, an indication that either they don’t trust Oswalt’s injury or they perceive that Oswalt wants to return to Texas.  Boswell doesn’t really answer, just noting that Buehrle throws about as hard as Milone.

Q: So who do you think we have in CF starting next year?

A: Someone that we either sign or acquire from outside the organization.  The easy guess would be BJ Upton, but a couple things have to happen before that happens.  There’s a few other interesting options that could serve as another 1 year hold-over til we figure things out.  I don’t see the team depending on Werth in center full time.  Ankiel was excellent defensively but was awful at the plate and the team should go in a different direction.  Boswell goes with Upton, after a non-tender.

Q: Boz – Rizzo makes numerous references to the Nats being open to trades. The team is in the unique position of having a surplus of young talent. Who do you think are the untouchables and who are the prospects that we may never see play in a Nats uniform because they were traded away?

A: Untouchables: Harper, Strasburg, Espinosa, Zimmerman, Rendon, Purke, Cole, Goodwin, Meyer, Norris, Peacock. Potentially in play for trades: Storen, Clippard, Solis, Ray, Desmond, Hood, Marrero, Detwiler, Lannan and pretty much anyone else.  Prospects we may never see in a Nats uniform?  That’s a harder question to guess on.  There’s certainly guys who seem blocked in a certain extent, but I’m guessing we trade MLB talent to unblock them before we trade them as prospects.  The team has come too far with its farm system to just throw away the fruits of it.  Boswell agrees mostly; he’s too busy using these questions as a forum to trash the Redskins.

Q: So do you think there is a chance that they sign Zim to a long term contract now or are we in danger of him going to free agency? I don’t want to see him in a Yankees/Phillies uniform.

A: This is a better question for NEXT off-season.  However if I’m Rizzo, and Zimmerman spends another couple months on the DL this season with some random injury, I’m really, really hesitant to give him a Troy Tulowitzki/Ryan Braun type of extension.  I may just allow him to leave or trade him mid 2013 (assuming the team isn’t in 1st place at the time).  By the way, he’ll never play for the Yankees; they have roughly $170M locked up in Alex Rodriguez‘s aging bat for the next decade.  Phillies?  I don’t think they have much in the way of payroll flexibility in the 2013 timeframe.  A real possibility is Boston; i have a future blog post detailing the scenario they could find themselves in sooner than later.  Boswell says they can, and should do the deal, despite the risks b/c he may be a lot more expensive next off-season.

Q: If you were starting an MLB team today, who would you want as your ace? Clayton Kershaw or Stephen Strasburg? Kershaw already has a Cy Young yet is only four months older than Strasburg.

A: I call this the Jason Amos question, my LA Dodger following friend who posed this same question to us earlier this season.  Right now, if I had to choose between the two I’d have to go Kershaw.  Strasburg could be a question mark for years to come.  If Strasburg thorugh finishes a couple of healthy seasons I may change my mind.  Strasburg has such a higher level of dominance capability that you’d have to choose that for the longer term, if you were convinced of his health.

A follow up question though; are either Kershaw or Strasburg the best young pitcher in baseball?  I say maybe not: Felix Hernandez and Clay Buchholz have both put up pretty good seasons in their pre-arbitration years.  Guys like Ian Kennedy, Michael Pineda, David Price also put their names in the mix.

Boswell says Kershaw, saying he’s “done it.”  Fair enough.

Q: After Harper’s Arizona Fall League performance, is there any chance he makes the opening day squad if he is the best candidate coming out of spring training?

A: There is a chance, if only because Davey Johnson has made a habit of selecting precocious and talented players and sticking with them.  Guys like Doc Gooden and Daryl Strawberry.  However, the arithmetic penalty for getting Harper into super-2 status by accident is pretty clear; it could cost the team north of $15M.  So, my gut says Harper will be left in Harrisburg to tear up AA for a few weeks, move up to Syracuse and join the team in mid June.  If he earns it, of course.  Boswell agrees with this assessment, then gives up a nugget; apparently Johnson “called up” most of the 9/1 call ups without really conferring with Rizzo, meaning they had to scramble to do the 40-man moves to make it happen.

Q: I noticed that the Nats added catcher Jhonatan Solano to their 40-man roster. This seems to indicate that they will trade one of their catchers (most likely Derek Norris) in exchange for a centerfielder. My best guess is Norris, LaRoche (assuming the Nats eat most of his contract), and Marrero to the Rays for Upton. What do you think?

A: The Nats added Solano for spare-part cover, nothing more.  It indicates nothing about a potential trade, only that they didn’t have another MLB-ready catcher on the 40-man in case Ramos or Flores gets hurt straight away.  Norris isn’t ready yet, but is a better prospect than Flores (and possibly than Ramos).  I think the trade bait is really Flores.

By the way, that trade offer for Upton is awful.  The Rays are most likely non-tendering the guy; why would we give up such a haul for him?  GMs know the Rays are hamstrung and will wait them out.  Just as the Twins should never have traded Ramos, the Nats will be hard pressed to give up Norris.

Q: Considering the abysmal state of sports in DC (including, right now, the Caps) is it the time for the Nats to take advantage and go big now? Rizzo’s MO is to fly under the radar on free agency and trades so there’s little that’s going to come from the Nats by way of info. Do you think they might be considering going after some of the big names, such as Pujols or Fielder (and trading LaRoche)?

A: Why deviate from the plan now?  This team is getting setup for the very long term, generating a ton of rising talent, cost contained, while augmenting where needed with key free agents.  LaRoche has zero trade value, so unless you want to waste 1/8th of your payroll you have to use him.  I think blowing $200M on either Pujols or Fielder would be shortsighted and would unnecessarily hamstring this franchise going forward.  Boswell thinks its a good idea.

Here’s some of the more recent Nats-themed news items I’ve read this past few days, with some thoughts sprinkled in.

• The team spent some time adjusting the delivery of 2011 draftee Alex Meyers in the instructional league.  I like seeing this; the scouting report on Meyers basically says a) he as a great arm, and b) he’s going to struggle to contain it.  If the team sees some adjustments that make his delivery more repeatable, perhaps Meyers goes from a reliever projection to a starter projection.
• Been reading rumors and posts about how the Nats are going to go after Jose Reyes in the off-season.  Here’s the problems I see with going after someone like Reyes.  The team likes Ian Desmond and he has been improving … and he’s cost contained.  Reyes is going to cost, what, $15-18m/year?  Is it worth signing a big contract for someone when you’ve got a serviceable and improving prospect in place?  Here’s the other thing that really worries me about Reyes; his clear “contract year” production.  Check out his 2011 slash line versus his career: .337/.384/.493 versus career of .292/.341/.441.  That’s a clear jump of at least 40 points in each category.  He’s injury prone (missing at least a month’s worth of games in each of the past two years and most of the 2009 season) and his speed is declining (going from .4875 SB/game at his peak to just .30 sb/game this past season).  I know there’s no statistical “proof” of contract year production going across ALL contract year players … but that doesn’t mean that it doesn’t happen.  When a guy playing for his one big FA contract suddenly improves across the board, and, oh he happens to be playing for a franchise that is going nowhere but down … you can see how the incentives are to play well and get out.
• Matt Purke‘s first AFL start?  Not good.  22 pitches, just 10 for strikes, sitting 89-91 on his fastball and getting hit hard (line: 1/3 IP, 7 ER, 5 H, 1 BB, 0 K, 1 HR).  Keith Law’s tweet said “Washington LHP Matt Purke 87-91 in first, nothing sharp, has given up five runs so far after seven batters.”  Now, its clear he’s got quite a bit of “rust” from not facing live pitching since May, so we won’t over-react TOO much.  But 87-91?  That’s not good.  His subsequent appearances have been rough as well.
• My alma-mater James Madison University gets to host the CAA baseball championships for the first time in 25 years in 2012.  JMU baseball has always been solid and has made the 64-team field several times over the past two years (though almost always being stuck in a regional hosted by someone like UNC or UVA).  Their claim to fame is one CWS appearance in 1983 (though this article is clearly dated … it talks about how JMU is the only Virginia school ever to make the CWS).  They have a beautiful new baseball complex in Harrisonburg and my dad and I may just go see this tourney.
• This isn’t Nats related, but this is an absolutely fantastic Sports Illustrated story about 50’s minor leaguer Jack Swift, the last minor leaguer to win 30 games in a season.  9-parts, great read, a reminder of what baseball used to mean in this country.
• The Phillies (not surprisingly, in this opinion) declined their option on starter Roy Oswalt on 10/25.  On the same day they declined their option on deposed closer Brad Lidge as well.  Lidge’s option rejection was always going to occur; nobody wants to pay $12.5M for an unreliable closer when history shows that you can mostly throw just about anyone into that role and be successful.  Meanwhile team also has a closer-quality FA in Ryan Madson who they could re-sign at 1/3rd the price of Lidge.  Now, do I think the Nats should go after any of these guys?  Oswalt should be incentivised to return to the Phillies on a more reasonable 2 or 3 year deal commensurate with his advancing age and declining performance.  If things don’t work out?  I’d certainly be willing to give him a Jason Marquis type deal (albeit with more money…) and bring him on board as the Nats #3 starter.
• Yu Darvish‘s name keeps coming up and the Nats continue to be associated with him.  Latest rumors come via Rizzo’s press conference this week, where he admitted that the Nats had some scouts in Japan watching Darvish this season.  So what?  Half the teams in the majors have scouts in asia now.  Mark Zuckerman‘s thursday post lends some sanity to the discussion.  I continue to agree with Zuckerman; for the amount of money and the amount of risk that comes with Darvish, the Nats should look elsewhere to spend dollars.  Perhaps not this off-season (where the starting pitching FA crop is relatively weak) but NEXT year when its pretty strong.
• Talks continue with Chien-Ming Wang, but nothing is close, per Amanda Comak on thursday.  This is probably nothing new and just a one-off story from Rizzo’s press conference.  I’m glad the team is already talking to Wang though and hope they work it out.
• From the department of the obvious: Davey Johnson will be retained as the manager for 2012.  As if there was ever any question.
• Under considerably less fan-fare than the ongoing NBA talks, MLB and its players union are working on an extension to the existing labor agreement, which expires in December.  The main issue according to this scribe will be negotiating signing bonuses for its draftees.  I’m of the belief that the commissioner wants a slotting system simply because he’s a shill for the owners, and the owners know that a slotted system basically eliminates the ability of agents for amateurs to negotiate and gain leverage over their teams.  Its a restriction of free trade for these amateurs, most of whom will never make the majors and most of whom need the signing bonuses to live on while they earn pennies for their hours ($800 a month for lower level minor leaguers??) for the next few years as they rise in the systems.  One thing that I (the fan) do want to see is a far earlier signing deadline.  Enough of this BS where 1st rounders get drafted in June then don’t bother trying to negotiate until the 2nd week of August.  My solution?  Push the deadline up for anyone signed in the first 10 rounds to something almost immediately after the draft dates.  Keep the existing deadline for anyone signed AFTER the 10th round.  Why?  Because most of the people signed after the 10th round are either college seniors who have no leverage and will get miniscule signing bonuses anyway, college juniors who are ready to start playing pro ball and who want to sign quickly anyways and won’t be holding out forever, and fliers on HSers who may or may not want to go to college, but the extra time gives teams a chance to watch them play in the summer and negotiate.
• SI.com’s Jon Heyman tweets that the Nats plan on going after CJ Wilson.  *sigh*.  Why do I think that’s going to be a mistake?  My feeling is that he’s a #3 (perhaps barely a #2) guy who’s going to get #1 money and will severely disappoint his new team.  Of course, there’s going to be so much demand for Wilson this off-season, the Nats may get scared off by high bids from big-money teams who are desperate for pitching.
• Game 6 of the World Series may have been the best game i’ve ever witnessed.  Not “best played” necessarily (because of all the errors, and the mental errors by players on both sides), or even “best managed” (you can fault both managers for their bullpen and bench management during the game).  But in terms of pure excitement and suspense, it is hard to beat.

Here’s my latest personal answers to Bill Ladson‘s inbox, 10/10/11 edition.

As always, I edit the questions for clarity, and write my own response before reading Ladson’s.

Q: Why is there constant talk of the Nationals pursuing Rays outfielder B.J. Upton? The Nationals have a crowded outfield with Michael Morse, Jayson Werth and Bryce Harper. The Nationals are getting killed in on-base percentage, so why trade for Upton who barely bats .250 with a less than impressive OBP. Wouldn’t a better route be to pursue an infielder with a traditional OBP and trade either Ian Desmond or Danny Espinosa?

A: Good question.  The Nats like B.J. Upton b/c he fills two needs for this team; plus defense CF and lead-off hitter.  In theory anyway; I agree with the questioner that Upton may be more hype than hope.   His 2011 was better than his career line, but was less than impressive .243/.331/.429.  He’s slugging the ball more, hitting for more power, but a .331 OBP isn’t that much better than what we were getting out of our own lead-off hitters.  Lets not forget either that Bryce Harper isn’t going to be in the opening day 2012 lineup, so its not like he’s ready to go.  We still need a CF solution for 2012 and i’m guessing that we go with another year of Rick Ankiel.  Ladson more or less agrees, predicting that the team acquires two outfielders this off-season.

Q: With the Nats still looking for pop in the lineup, is it out of the question for them to pursue first baseman Albert Pujols or Prince Fielder and keep Morse in left?

A: I don’t think its out of the question, but I would be really surprised if either marquee first baseman is pursued or signed.  They’re both going to command massive, major financial commitments and for a team that has held steady at $60-$68M in payroll, I have a hard time seeing them sign off.  Remember, we still have Adam LaRoche coming back, and Rizzo didn’t sign him for the hell of it.  Ladson thinks the team may actually pursue Fielder to add lefty pop to the lineup.

Q: Do you see Yankees outfielder Brett Gardner as a possible trade acquisition for the Nationals. What have you heard?

A: Why in the world would the Yankees trade Gardner?  Pre-arbitration, decent lead-off option and gold-glove defender in left.  We have a left-fielder.  It would take a severe prospect haul to get him, and I don’t think we really need him long term.  Ladson thinks he’s a great fit and that it is an intriguing deal.

Q: This may sound crazy but what about putting left-hander John Lannan and outfielder Roger Bernadina in a package for a quality starter? Lannan, in my mind, hasn’t been a quality starter and Bernadina hasn’t improved during his time with the Nats.

A: Bernadina is value-less in a trade; he’s out of options and teams know it, so all they have to do is wait until April 1st, 2012 and they can have him for free.  Lannan IS a quality starter already; he’s not going to ever get us value in return near what he gives us already.  I don’t think either guy is really someone that helps us in terms of trade.  Ladson agrees.

Q: Do the Nats conduct “exit interviews” whereby they suggest offseason training, workouts and how the player should work on his deficiencies?

A: I’m sure they do for returning players; i’d guess FAs are just told thanks and we’ll see you.  These players are investments, and if the player is motivated he’ll want to do in the off-season what guarantees the most success in 2012.  Ladson says that Davey Johnson spoke to every player on the last day of the season, reviewed their performance and talked about 2012.

Q: Behind the scenes, was the Nats’ coaching staff holding the players accountable for the high number of strikeouts that were accumulated in 2011?

A: I don’t know if you can “hold a player accountable” for strikeouts.  I think strikeouts come with the territory for some hitters; i’ll take a guy that hits 20 homers with more than his average number of Ks.  However, a high strikeout guy who is a slap hitter for no power?  Bad news.  That’s the kind of guy that needs adjustment to his game.   Ladson notes that Johnson clearly wants the team to take less strikeouts, especially called 3rd strikes, and mentions three guys in particular.  Werth, Desmond and Espinosa.  Fair enough.

MLB beat writer Bill Ladson doesn’t do mailbags that often, and when he does sometimes his answers are arguable.  Here’s his 10/3/11 edition.

Q: Do you think Davey Johnson will return as manager of the Nationals in 2012?

Q: Are the Nationals thinking about moving Ian Desmond to center field, Danny Espinosa to shortstop and Stephen Lombardozzi to second? They always say that shortstops are the best skilled players. I think they will get the center fielder they need and improve their infield defense.

A: (the same question was posed in Boswell’s chat on monday): I don’t think Desmond helps the team in Center.  You need more production out of center fielders.  If Desmond can’t cut it for this team at Short, we’ll trade him and put Espinosa there.  Lombardozzi hasn’t shown me that he’s anything more than a Brian Bixler-utility guy, and the team may bide its time until Anthony Rendon is ready.  Ladson reminds us how much the team, and Johnson, likes Desmond.

Q: If the Nationals are looking for a center fielder, why not Carlos Beltran, even though he is aging and has been hurt in the past? He seems to fit all of the Nationals’ needs and is a good veteran presence for some of the young players.

A: Three primary reasons: Beltran isn’t a center fielder anymore.  He’s now a corner outfielder at this point in his career.  Plus I think you’d be overpaying for a contract year.  Lastly, he’s a type-A free agent, meaning it would cost us your #16 overall pick.  Ladson points out that he’s a corner outfielder.  He’d be for a one-year deal, that’s it.

Q: Stephen Strasburg, Jordan Zimmermann and John Lannan are locks for next year’s rotation. Considering Mike Rizzo would like to acquire a veteran starter, that would mean that Chien-Ming Wang (if re-signed), Ross Detwiler, Brad Peacock, Tom Milone and the other Minor Leaguers will all be fighting for one spot?

A: This seems like the current situation, yes.  However, I would not be surprised to see some of this starter depth flipped for a plus defender that we can put out in leadoff/center field.  Lannan could be trade bait (though I think we’d struggle to get enough for him to match how this team values him).  Wang is no sure thing to re-sign.  Detwiler pretty much HAS to make the team in 2012, so you may have your rotation already stated. Ladson just says generically that you can never have enough depth.

Q: I think Chris Marrero has proven in a short time that he is a Major League hitter. What role, if any, do you think he will have with the team next season?

A: Good question: he hit well, but doesn’t seem to have the power you need to man the First Base position in the majors.  Its tough to take a .300 hitter out of the lineup though.  Of course, he wasn’t a .300 hitter by the end of the season (final slash line: .248/.274/.294); a 5-game slide to end the season cost him 40 batting average points.  Marrero’s problem is a lack of power.  His slugging percentage wasn’t even at .300; it needs to be closer to .500 to play first base.  I think he starts 2012 back in AAA, waiting for an injury or slow Adam LaRoche start to get a call-back.  Ladson predicts trade chip or 2012 bench player.

Q: Since being sent to the bullpen, Tom Gorzelanny has done a pretty decent job. Do you see him back in the bullpen next year?

A: Yes you bet.  Gorzelanny’s bullpen split for 2011 was great; 2.42 era in 15 games.  He immediately takes over the primary long-man/spot-starter role and features as a middle reliever as needed.  He’s just the kind of guy that Davey Johnson likes in the pen.  Ladson agrees.

Q: You have reported that the Nats’ front office isn’t sold on outfielder Roger Bernadina. Please explain how Werth, Jonny Gomes and Brian Bixler are improvements.

A: At least Werth provides enough power and OBP to pull his OPS+ value up to nearly 100 in a season where he struggled mightily.  Bernadina doesn’t get on base nearly as much and doesn’t slug as much, meaning on average he’s about 20% less valuable a hitter than a MLB average player.  And he’s done this consistently across 1000+ at bats at the major league level.

Gomes is not an improvement; he was a mid-season bench augmentation who probably gets non-tendered in November.  Meanwhile, Bixler is not an apples-to-apples comparison.  Teams need utility infielders to provide cover at 2nd, short and 3rd.  Bernadina is a backup outfielder who can be replaced, and is replaceable.

I’m not sold on Bernadina either; he’s had plenty of chances and i doubt he’s part of the organization in 2012.  Ladson says he never said these three guys were replacements for Bernadina, but thinks that Gomes and Bixler are not with the team in 2012.

Q: Despite his inconsistency, Hernandez definitely shows that he wants to stay with the Nationals and brings so much to the clubhouse. He is even willing to become a long reliever. With that in mind, do you think he’ll be re-signed?

A: Good question.  Initially I thought he’d be resigned as a valuable and cheap middle relief/spot starter guy.  But now i’m worried there’s not going to be room for the guy in the bullpen.  I think our 2012 bullpen starts with Storen, Clippard, Burnett, Mattheus, HRodriguez, Gorzelanny as near locks.  The 7th guy could be a FA signing, or perhaps Peacock or even Stammen.  Livan needs too long to warm up to really be useful in the bullpen.  Sorry to say; i think we part ways.  Ladson says that Gorzelanny is the “swingman” and that the team won’t need two.  Fair enough.

The Nats season may be over, and the Redskins may be 3-1 (thus implying that 98% of local sports radio be devoted to the minutae of the team), but i’m hoping Tom Boswell takes some baseball questions still during his normal monday morning chat.

Questions are edited for clarity and space, and I write my answer before reading Boswell’s.  We’ll only address baseball-related questions.

Q: Was the last day of the 2011 baseball season the greatest day in baseball history?

A: Well, considering that baseball’s been played for 150+ years, and we’ve only lived to see and judge 25-30 years of it, and we’ve only had baseball readily available on TV to the extent where we could truly appreciate a night like what happened … its tough to say its the best ever.  Yes absolutely though it was the best in recent memory.  Boswell agrees.

Q: Thoughts on the Red Sox’s parting ways with Franconia and possibly Epstein?

A: The Red Sox spent an awful lot of money … and ended up with an awful lot of injuries to those well-paid players, especially in the rotation.  In September they were basically without 3/5ths at one point of the opening day roster.  No team can survive that, especially one that has traded so many of its prospects lately to acquire the hitting talent it has.  Terry Franconia has been there a while and, while its probably not his fault the team plummeted as it did, he’ll take the fall.  Theo Epstein: I’d think he’d want to stay and try to get one more WS win out of this team.  Unfortunately it probably isn’t happening any time soon: his team still has a bunch of under-performers under contract for 2012 and looks to be stuck with a bloated payroll without many impact players, again.  Boswell thinks Franconia got the short end of the stick, and that any firing of Epstein would be a major over-reaction.  Agreed.

Q: Did the Orioles “over-celebrate” by beating the Red Sox on the last day?

A: Maybe so.  But its hard to fault the team for playing and winning a playoff-caliber game.  Boswell didn’t answer this part, but did talk about Matt Moore and how good he’s looked.  Moore was the subject of an analysis post I did over the weekend.  He looked fantastic and could be a secret weapon for Tampa Bay this playoffs.

Q: Will the Red Sox find someone to manage their club as good as Franconia?

A: Probably not; there’s a ton of good candidates out there but in all likelihood we won’t see a major discipline guy taking over.  Odds are that we’ll see a bench coach or someone within the organization.  Boswell says if Valentine goes, expect even more drama.

Q: (Great Question): should a team’s success factor into the Cy Young and MVP voting?

A: Cy Young: no.  It shouldn’t matter how the team does.  If a guy is the best pitcher in the league, he’s the best pitcher.  Yes “Wins” are a flawed statistic, giving credit to a pitcher for only half the battle in winning a ball game.  But mostly pitching is an individual, mano-y-mano embarkment.   MVP?  Yes I believe the team’s position in the standings has an effect.  Simple question; how can you be the Most Valuable Player in the league for a team that is 20 games under .500?  I just don’t think you can be.  If you’re not leading a team to the playoffs, or playing meaningful games 100% of the time, then it doesn’t matter how valuable you are to your own team, let alone the rest of the league.  Boswell posits an argument i’ve never heard; batters get 650-700 plate appearances but starting pitchers face > 1000 batters.  Good argument; still not enough to get me to consider pitchers for MVP awards.

Q: How did a supposedly great analysis team like the Red Sox err so badly in the Carl Crawford contract?

A: Carl Crawford was a nice player in Tampa, but it was always going to be a risk putting someone who wasn’t used to the pressure cooker of baseball in Boston or New York who wasn’t used to it.  The Red Sox vastly overpaid for Crawford, feeling as if they had to pay him more than the Jayson Werth contract, and they ended up with a lesser player.  Boswell points out some interesting observations; Crawford’s power is to right, he never pulls the ball and his asset in defense is speed.  All three of those points are completely negated by playing in Fenway.  Could get ugly in Boston.

Q: When are the Nats going to re-sign Ryan Zimmerman?

A: I’d guess after NEXT season.  Despite the supposed pressure to get him re-upped on a big contract, he already IS on a big contract.  And that contract runs through 2013.  So he’s still got two years on it, so no point in talking about it or worrying about it.   Boswell says the team should push this, but guesses Zimmerman waits until he has a good start to 2012 to negotiate from strength, not from the weakness following a sub-par year as he had in 2011.

Q: Did Davey Johnson have a bad road split?  Is he going to be the 2012 manager?

A: Just did some quick analysis: the team had 38 road games after Johnson took over and went 18-20 in them.  That’s actually better than their overall 36-45 record on the road all season.  I don’t know why there’s stories about a manager search; why wouldn’t he come back to manage in 2012?  Boswell notes he went 40-40 after the initial 3-game series loss to the Angels.

Q: Thoughts on Jose Reyes’ sitting down to protect his average?

A: Bush league.  Ted Williams, he is not.  If your manager takes you out to give the home crowd a chance to give you one last cheer, that’s acceptable.  To ask out of a game after bunting for a hit is akin to an NBA player purposely missing a shot to get an extra rebound so as to get a triple-double.  Boswell agrees.

Q: Do the Nats need to get a high priced FA starting pitcher?

A: Well.  Lets answer the question this way.  Yes, they need another FA pitcher, but there’s not one available this year that will be worth the money.  This season’s crop of FA starters is weak and the two big money teams both desperately need starting pitching and will be driving prices WAY up on guys like CJ Wilson and Edwin Jackson, far over what they’re worth.  I think the team needs to stay out of these feeding frenzies.  2013’s crop is far better, and we also have enough pitching depth to possibly work a trade.  Boswell says its a tough call then reminds everyone we went after Greinke hard and couldn’t believe the deal was turned down.

Q: What do the Nats do with the leadoff position for 2012?

A: Amazingly, they go into this off-season with pretty much the same issue they had LAST off season.  They need a reliable lead-off hitter, and they need a reliable center fielder.  They’d love to get one guy who can do both jobs.  Personally, I think a trade is happening this off season, with the team going after BJ Upton again, pitching Tampa Bay to save the $6-$7M they’re going to have to pay him in his last arbitration year.  There’s a couple of FA center fielders of note, but they’re under performers or injury risks (David DeJesus, Grady Sizemore being the two names i’d think about).  Might as well roll the dice with one more year of Rick Ankiel. Boswell notes that Goodwin and Rendon could be hitting 1-2 in a couple years.  Not exactly the question that was asked.

Q: Have the Nats considered moving Desmond to CF, and sliding Espinosa to SS and playing Lombardozzi at 2B?

A: Hmmmm.  I havn’t seen this particular formation postulated.  I’d say this is a no-go because Lombardozzi looked 110% overmatched in his September call-up and may have a ceiling of utility guy.   But its an interesting question.  What about Lombardozzi in center?  The question is; can he hit leadoff?  Boswell doesn’t think Desmond can ever be a good enough leadoff hitter.

Q: Do the Nats make a run at Terry Franconia?

A: No way.  Johnson is just as good a manager.  You stick with what you have.  Boswell agrees.

Q: Is CJ Wilson worth giving up our first round pick in free agency?  What about Pujols or Fielder?

A: Yes …. but he’s not going to be worth the sky-high salary that he’ll be offered by the Yankees to come in and help restore their pitching staff.  Both Pujols/Fielder would be great in the short term but would likely be albatross contracts before they’re said and done (as A-Rod’s already looks, and as Ryan Howards looks like it will be).  Boswell says he likes our current arms more than Wilson, and says Morse at $4M is better value than Pujols at $25M.  True.

Q:  What do you make of the way the Nats finished the season?

A: Very promising … with some caution.  Beware September success, since your young guys often times are playing other team’s younger guys.   The only meaningful games we really played in September were against teams in playoff races (Atlanta).  I will say that the big take away from this finish was just how poorly the team fared by giving starts to Livan Hernandez and Jason Marquis.  Once those guys were removed from the rotation and replaced with our upper end prospects, the team won and won frequently.  Boswell agrees, pointing out that this team got to 80 wins, only one of which was by Strasburg!

Q: Were the 80 wins ahead of your expectations?

A: Absolutely.  I can’t find any proof of this, but I think 72-75 wins was considered a great goal for 2011.  80 wins, a 10 game improvement over 2010 (itself a 10 game improvement over 2009) is a huge win for this team.  Another 10-game improvement suddenly puts this team squarely into Wild Card competition, and another 10-game improvement in 2013 puts us as World Series contenders.  I think this is a great path and a great goal.    Boswell predicted 72 at start, bumped to 77 mid-season.

Q: What does the Nats focus on in the offseason? SP or CF/Leadoff guy?

A: I always classify off-season priorities as follows: Fantasy, Reality and Less Likely.  I’ll post a more detailed post about this after the WS is over, but Fantasy for me is Pujols or a frontline Starter, Reality includes attempting to find a center fielder and then filling in some holes in the bullpen and on the bench.  Boswell didn’t address.

Q: Who do you think is on the trading block for the Nats? Lannan has been getting a lot of play lately? Would BJ Upton be the best option for us?

A: The Nats clearly have pitching depth, and have more major league ready starters than they have spots for.  Lannan is an underrated starter and could be a good #3 or #4 starter for a contender.  Problem is, the Rays have zero need for a starter like John Lannan and it would probably cost the Nats a much better prospect to pry loose someone like BJ Upton.  I’d like to have Upton but don’t want to burn a high-end prospect like Norris or Rendon to get him.  Boswell correctly points out that Lannan is undervalued by other teams besides us, who don’t see his improvements and every day accomplishments.  Upton is a wild card for sure.

Q: Could the Nats go after an “Impact” bat, like Michael Cuddyer?

A:  Cuddyer isn’t really an impact bat in the same vein as Pujols or Fielder.  I don’t see a spot for Cuddyer, who can play a bunch of positions but everything he can play is a position we’re ably filling right now (RF, 2B, 3B, 1B).   Boswell thinks our hitters are scheduled for a rebound.

Q: Are the Phillies vulnerable?  Can the Brewers make a run?

A: Phillies don’t *seem* vulnerable, not with 3 shutdown arms and a 4th who would be most team’s best hurler.  The Brewers look like they could go far, with a good balance of pitching and hitting.  Boswell says that the Card’s 3 potent hitters could make things dicey for Philly.

Q: What is the best WS match up for TV?  What’s the best matchup for the true fan?

A: TV: the two biggest markest clearly (NYY vs Philly).   For the fans?  It’d be nice to see two long-suffering franchises go at it (Detroit-Milwaukee).  I’d like to see big money versus little money (Philly-Tampa), which would also match the two best pitching staffs.  For offense-minded teams it’d probably be Texas (or NY) versus St. Louis.  NYY-St. Louis is great for traditionalists; these are the two teams with the most WS victories.  Boswell likes it when non-traditional powers get into the series.

Wow, that was a lot of baseball talk.

Nationals News Network blogger Dave Nichols runs a few polls beginning and end of season, hitting up all the Nats bloggers out there for opinions.  Here’s the 2011 post-season results.

Here’s how I answered his questions, with some thoughts added in.

• Nats MVP: Morse, Clippard and Zimmerman.  For me clearly Morse was this team’s most valuable player this year, going from 4th outfielder to 30 homer clean up hitter in short order.  Clippard was your all-star but Morse was the more deserving candidate.
• Starter of the Year: Zimmermann, Lannan, Marquis.  I think Zimmermann’s come-back was fantastic, and he was clearly your best arm in the rotation (at least until September).  Lannan continued his boring-if-effective career, and everyone seems to forget that Marquis was pretty good the first couple of months.
• Reliever of the Year: Clippard, Storen, Coffey (though it pained me to say it).  Finding the first 2 was easy; finding a third reliever candidate who wasn’t mostly awful this season was really tough.  Burnett struggled mightily but turned it around.  Henry Rodriguez has been lights out in September, but September only.  Slaten was awful all year.  Broderick and Gaudin couldn’t exit quickly enough.  Perhaps Mattheus was more deserving of the year-long award.
• All around Hitter of the year: Zimmerman, Morse, Hairston.  Probably could have switched the first two here as well, based on Morse’s excellent BA with power.  Hairston’s contributions over the course of the season were pretty understated, but he was a solid member of this team.
• Slugger of the year: Morse, Espinosa, Nix.  Morse is obvious.  Espinosa showed some pretty rare power for a 2nd baseman.  And Nix’s homer/ab ratio puts him on nearly a 30-homer pace for a full season.  Can’t beat that.
• Defensive player of the year: Zimmerman, Espinosa, (amazingly) Desmond: pretty obvious candidates.  However UZR/150 was not kind to this team generally this year.   Espinosa is a plus defender at 2nd and Desmond made huge strides.  Probably in retrospect should have included Ankiel, who has the best UZR of any near-regular in the lineup.
• Comeback player of the year: Zimmermann, Wang, Flores: 3 pretty obvious candidates.  We’ll save Strasburg for the 2012 version.
• Humanitarian of the year: Zimmerman, Desmond, Storen.  I’m only even aware of Zimmerman as someone who has a charity or a foundation.  Desmond was the team’s Clemente nominee, so he must be doing something right.

Lastly:

• Minor League player of the year: Peacock, Lombardozzi, Moore.

The phrasing of this question threw me off.  The minor league “player of the year” is DIFFERENT from “player most destined for big league success,” which was the explanatory text Nichols put into the survey.  Clearly Peacock and Lombardozzi were our minor league players of the year and were so awarded by the team, but I’m not sure either is really a top-ceiling MLB prospect.   Our three best prospects most destined for success in the majors (<2011 draft version) are probably Harper, Cole, and either Solis or Ray.  Throw in the 2011 draft and that list probably becomes Rendon, Harper, Purke.

Additional Questions: here’s a few add-on survey questions.

1. Players we’re parting ways with after 2011: Livan, Coffey, Balester, Slaten, Pudge, Cora, Gomes, Elvin Ramirez.  This implies we’re going to keep Gorzelanny, Wang, Bixler, Nix, Ankiel and Bernadina.  I’m guessing Bernadina passes through waivers and stays.  Gorzelanny becomes a long reliever.  Wang resigns, Nix stays on as the 4th outfielder and Ankiel sticks in CF.
2. Does Zimmerman sign an extension this coming off season?  No; he’ll sign it AFTER the 2012 season.
3. Biggest Surprise: Morse clearly.
4. Biggest Disappointment: LaRoche.  Maya 2nd.  Lots of people will say Werth, but in the end we all kinda knew the contract was a mistake and he’s struggle to live up to it.  LaRoche was supposed to at least contribute, and he did nearly none of that.
5. Favorite pro beat writer: Zuckerman
6. Favorite Nats blogger: Love Sue Dinem’s work; my blog would be twice as hard without it.

Brad Peacock fires in another fastball during his debut start last night. (Photo by Christopher Pasatieri/Getty Images via sbnation.com)

As a fan of the team, its always neat to see shots of the parents of an up and coming rookie and to listen to the in-game interviews done by Masn’s Debbie Taylor.  Collin Balester‘s dad was wearing a big hawaiian shirt and was clearly telling his entire section “that’s my son” while pointing at the field.  Craig Stammen‘s parents were a bit more reserved and mentioned their faith while praising their son’s performance.  Last night, Brad Peacock‘s dad (a retired cop) was jubilant (if ill-dressed for the occasion) but gave a great mid-inning interview while holding Brad’s son on his lap.  That kind of stuff reminds you about something you often forget about when following a team of highly-paid athletes; these guys are people too.  They have families, they have priorities, hopes and dreams, and their parents root for them just like your own parents rooted for you when you were a kid.  Anyway…

Last night 9/14, Brad Peacock got his first major league start against the Mets, in New York (box/gamer).  Though I posted some thoughts on his MLB debut a week ago, it was clearly not the most optimal debut for a rookie starter (brought in with runners on base and pitching from the stretch against an MVP candidate).  Last night is a much better indication of what kind of pitcher Peacock may be and what his capabilities are setting up hitters multiple times and working deeper into games.

Game Summary: On the night Peacock’s line was great: 5ip, 0 runs on 2 hits and 3 walks.  He had a wild pitch that *maybe* should have been caught by Jesus Flores but which didn’t hurt him.

Early on in the game, Peacock was clearly not getting calls when he missed his spots.  He had more than a few calls that were clearly in the “K zone” graphic that MASN uses, but he had missed the target that Flores set up for him.  One of the two hits he gave up was to  Reyes, who he clearly had struck out but didn’t get the call at the knees.  When he did give up harder-hit balls it was usually on pitches that he missed his location.  On more than a few occasions he missed out over the plate badly, but the velocity and/or movement on the pitch usually bailed him out, getting popups for foul balls.

After cruising through 3 no-hit innings (only blemish was a 2-out walk to the opposing pitcher), he gave up a decently struck single and then suddenly struggled to find the plate.  He had two walks and a wild pitch in the 4th to load the bases before getting a harmless popout.  He was more in control in the 5th, getting a nifty play out of Desmond and a one-pitch out from the opposing pitcher before having Reyes struck out (as mentioned before) but giving up the single before retiring Tejada on a liner to Werth.

Velocity: His fastball peaked at 95.1mph early, then he seemed to settle into a pattern of low-90s heat.  On the night he averaged 92.77mph on the 4-seamer.   This average MPH was a bit lower than during his MLB debut last week (pitch f/x for his debut here, where he averaged 94.15 and peaked at 95.8) and the commentators noted that Peacock’s velocity will average lower in starts than in relief efforts.  I’m not sure I believe that necessarily.  This team’s approach with its harder throwing starters has clearly been pitching to contact and working deeper into games at the expense of a couple MPH and a few strikeouts.  Was that what we saw last night?  Or was Peacock just tired from the adrenaline rush of his first start?  Or was an average of 94 versus 92 what we should expect during starts?  Everything we’ve heard from his stellar minor league season mentions a 95mph fastball, and you would have to think that implies a 95 average, not one 95mph heater every now and again while sitting consistently 92.  Yes, relievers can generally throw harder, since they go max-effort for an inning as opposed to having to protect their arm for 100 pitches over 6 innings, but it would be nice to know what to expect out of a starter.

Whatever the speed is on his fastball, the delta between it and his change-up is fantastic.  He threw a ton of change-ups (21 out of 94 pitches) and relied on it heavily.  His curve more often than not either bounced or started outside and kept on moving outside.  I’m not sure I ever saw an inside curve-ball attempt.

Pitch Counts: Through 5 complete innings  he was sitting at 94 pitches, needing 31 just to get through the fourth, and clearly his night was over.  94 pitches on the night, 61 for strikes for a pretty good strike/ball ratio.   However, 94 pitches to complete 5 innings is rather inefficient, especially for someone who only got two Ks on the night.  Lots of these strikes were foul balls, raising his pitch count and driving him from the game early.  He will need to find a way to avoid 30-pitch innings and 10-pitch at bats, and will need to work on getting through 6 or 7 innings on that same number of pitches.

GO/AO Ratios: More concerning was the very high ratio of air-outs versus ground-ball outs.  Of the 15 outs he recorded:

• 9 were fly balls or line drives to the outfield
• 2 were pop-ups caught in foul territory
• 2 were groundballs
• 2 were strikeouts.

(side note/complaint: the official box score lists ground-outs/fly-outs ratio as 2/6.  How do they possibly arrive at this ratio?  11 of his 15 outs were recorded via balls caught before they hit the ground, whether they were fly balls or pop ups.   I assume they don’t count foul-ball pop ups as “fly ball outs,” but do they not count the 3 fly-ball outs recorded that were more “line drive” than fly out?  At least they got the 2 ground-ball outs correctly tabulated).

That’s an air-out to ground-out ratio of 11/2.  That’s downright scary.  Conventional wisdom will tell you that a standard number of fly-ball outs turn into home-runs for normal pitchers, and “fly ball” pitchers therefore get tagged with a number of additional runs over their ground-ball pitcher compatriots.  This is one of the tenants of the xFIP stat (trying to adjust for “expected” FIP versus actual FIP by standardizing for typical fly-ball to home-run ratios) and sure enough Peacock’s Xfip sits at a monstrous 6.25 right now despite an ERA of 1.42.   Of course, we are talking about small sample sizes, and we’d need more information to really draw any conclusions going forward.

Repertoire: Peacock again showed that right now he’s a 2 and a half pitch hurler (here’s pitch f/x data on the night).  He featured a four-seam fastball that he relied on heavily, throwing it nearly 2/3s of the time, moving it inside and outside against hitters.  He has a pretty good change up that features a 10-mph difference from the fastball and that he commands pretty well and isn’t afraid to throw at any count.  And he has a big overhand “knuckle-curve” that features pretty true 12-6 movement but which he doesn’t command nearly as well (he threw 13 last night, only 5 for strikes, but one was an absolute beauty to Satin to get one of his two K’s on the night).

As has been noted by other scouting reports I’ve read, Peacock really needs to work on his curve and develop a 4th pitch if he wants to be a successful MLB pitcher.  I don’t perceive his 4-seamer to have enough movement to rely upon (think of Roy Halladay or Greg Maddux, both of whom had such great natural movement on their fastballs that they didn’t really “need” to develop their secondary pitches), and he clearly needs to work on his curve-ball command.  The over-hand throwing motion kind of precludes him from considering a cutter (perhaps) or from adding a slider to his arsenal.  He probably doesn’t use a 2-seamer because he’s not getting much movement on his 4-seamer now.  The overhand motion does lend it self to a couple of pitches he could try: a split-fingered fastball could come in a few mph slower than his current fastball but should exhibit sinking behavior similar to a 2-seam fastball.  Or a forkball could be a good pitch that tumbles and drops but which could be thrown a bit harder than a straight change.

Summary: I think he had a nice outing but had some clear areas of concern.  I am not sure he can stick as a MLB starter based on what i’m seeing, but could easily be a later innings relief guy (think Joel Hanrahan, and his conversion from 5-inning high ERA starter to effective closer).

This week’s chat being the day after an epic Redskins victory, i’d expect it to be football heavy.  I’ll parse out the Nats questions.

As always, I edit the “question” for levity and clarity, and write my response before reading Boswell’s.

Q: Did Nyjer Morgan really refer to Albert Pujols as “Alberta?”

A: Not in so many words; i think he just referred to him as “she” in a tweet.  I posted my response here, and lots of other pundits have a similar message; par for the course for Morgan.  He’s working his way off yet another franchise.  Pretty soon he’s gonna run out of chances.  Boswell says that Morgan was very quick to be defensive to reporter questions, and notes that an attack on Pujols won’t be forgotten for a while.

Q: What is the future of Chris Marrero?

A: He’s held his own upon being called up, with a .306/.352/.367 line as of monday 9/12/11.  Good average yes; where’s the power?  I don’t think you can play 1B in this league without being either a .350 hitter or putting up 30homers.  He’s relatively weak at 1B, which is the least-challenging defensive position out there.  I don’t know what the future holds; but I’m having doubts that he’s a long term major leaguer.  Boswell agrees, saying Marrero won’t start over LaRoche and seems to be a weak  hitter w/o a positions.

Q: How is it that Clippard is the 8th inning guy and Storen is the 9th inning guy?

A: I’d like to think that the team recognized that Clippard is the more valuable pitcher and therefore needs to pitch in the higher leverage situations as compared to Storen.  More likely, the two guys are used to their roles, enjoy them, and don’t want to rock the boat.  Boswell agrees with all my points.

Q: Any chance Rizzo leaves for Chicago?  If so, who replaces him?

A: I think there’s little chance Rizzo leaves.  Why would he leave mid-stream here to go take over a Chicago Cubs team that gutted its farm system to acquire Matt Garza, has $56M still owed to Alfonso Soriano, has a $19M 2012 guaranteed for Carlos Zambrano and (outside of Starlin Castro) seems to have little to no talent on the roster?   Maybe this is a challenge, but there’s so much deadweight there you’d have to think the turnaround is going to take a while.  That being said, Chicago would give him a payroll at least twice what he has here, and presumably the same draft resources.  So perhaps he’s sick of the cheapskate Lerners and will jump ship.  Who replaces him?  I would think there are plenty of internal candidates; bit name GMs probably don’t want any part of this team based on past history.  Boswell says Rizzo’s performance outside of DC is pretty high, and fans should be a bit worried.

Q: If you were planning a trip to Viera for Spring Training, when would you go?

A: I’d want to go early on; perhaps the first or 2nd week, so that you can see more than just the major leaguers.  I’d want to see the full experience; the non-roster invitees, the non-40 man guys, the vets on minor league deals just trying to hang on, etc.  Boswell agrees; first week.

Q: Are the new wave of kids enough for 2012, or is 2013 the year?

A: I’ve always said 2013 is the year.  2012 will be Strasburg’s come back year, Zimmermann’s “taking the next step” year, an important additional year for Desmond and Espinosa, a calming down year for Werth, and a “was I a flash in the pan year” for Morse.   We’ll have more time to try out different arms in the bullpen.  We can look to augment in the FA market (but its thin).  The post 2012 FA market is massive, and the team will have all of 2012 to evaluate the likes of Milone, Peacock, Lannan, Gorzelanny, and Detwiler to determine who gets replaced with a hired gun.  Boswell offered opinions of rookies, but nothing for 2012.

Q: Is there a culture of losing with this team?

A: Perhaps some.  But the more rookies rise up who are accustomed to success, replacing veterans who are just happy to have jobs and don’t care about the W/L record, the better the team’s attitude will be.  Boswell talks about problems that still exist in the operational staff.

Q: Should we have gone with a managerial “prospect” instead of Davey Johnson?

A: I don’t think so; this season was always a transitional one.  It was going to be just as instructive to learn if Johnson can still manage after a 12 year hiatus as it would be to give the job to Bo Porter or someone.   Boswell blows more sunshine up Johnson’s ass.

Q: What will Strasburg’s innings limit be next year?

A: Almost identical to Jordan Zimmermann’s this year.  160, give or take.  Boswell forgot to answer.

Q: Are we being alarmist with Strasburg’s lack of velocity in start #2?

A: No, I don’t think so.  How do you go from 98-99 and then 5 days later be 5mph slower?  I just hope its a tired arm and not something more serious.  Boswell admits to being a bit alarmist.

Nats-ville holds its breath for Strasburg's return. Photo allansgraphics.com via free-extras.com

All eyes were on big #37 tonight 9/6 (box/gamer), with Stephen Strasburg making his comeback.  I’ll be the 1000th opinion you will read about his return, but here’s what I thought of his return.

Final line: 5ip, 2hits, zero walks and four strikeouts.  56 pitches, 40 for strikes through 5 complete innings.  He left with a 3-0 lead but got a no-decision when his bullpen conspired to blow the lead.

Strasburg featured mostly 2- and 4-seam fastballs on the night, mixing in a handful of curveballs and a few well timed change-ups.  He sat mostly in the 96-97 range (average on the night was exactly 96.68) on his 4-seamer but (amazingly) humped his 2-seamer up to the 97 range as well (click here for his Pitch f/x data).  A 2-seam running fastball at 97mph is almost unfair to hitters, and if he can continue getting that kind of pace on a ball that moves so much that catchers have a hard time catching it, that’s bad news for the league.  It didn’t seem to me he really was commanding the curve (he only threw 3 of 7 for strikes), and he didn’t throw the change-up nearly as much as in 2010 (only five change-ups on the night).  This approach was perhaps because of who was calling the game; Ivan Rodriguez called lots of change-ups while Wilson Ramos seemed content to call a more conventional fastball-heavy game.  I’m guessing the coaching staff gave him some edicts about not abusing Strasburg’s arm with a bunch of circle-changes his first game back.  Personally I think it was over-use of the change-up that led to his arm injury, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see him develop something less stressful on his arm at some point to use as a change of pace pitch.

Strasburg’s mechanics seemed a bit more reserved, a bit stiffer perhaps than last year.  To me, he wasn’t efforting as much into each pitch as we have seen.  Perhaps this goes along with the same game-plan that Jordan Zimmermann has been employing; instead of running up your pitch count to get a bunch of Ks, try to pitch to contact and get hitters to go after your stuff earlier in the count.  Its better to go 7 or 8 innings on 100 pitches with 6 Ks than to be sitting at 100 pitches after 6 with 10 Ks.  You have a better chance of guaranteeing the win and saving the bullpen.

The Dodgers did their part in extending his planned outing from 4ip to 5 (albeit with a 60 pitch limit) by going up hacking.  They probably figured that Strasburg would be grooving 4-seamers to start everyone off with a routine fastball … and they were mostly right.  First pitch swinging continued into the 2nd pass through the lineup, to the point where I was wondering why Ramos wasn’t mixing up the pitch calling.  No matter; the Dodger hitters more or less couldn’t catch up to his fastball.  The two hits he allowed consisted of a game-leading off double on a jammed blooper over the shortstop’s head, and a grounder up the middle that Ian Desmond really should have gotten (it was a soft hit ruling, in my opinion).  Only one hitter really put good wood on anything Strasburg threw; James Loney lined a grooved fastball to right, but right at Jonny Gomes.

Perhaps the most impressive at bat of the night was the 2nd time MVP candidate Matt Kemp faced Strasburg.  He started Kemp off with a 2-seamer that rode the inside corner for strike one, then he blew a 98 mph 4-seamer at the knees over the outside part of the plate for strike 2.  An absolute unhittable ball.  The announcers thought he’d go curve; I knew he’d go change.  He threw an absolute gem of a change up, a diving 90mph 0-2 change up that Kemp waved at for the best 3-pitch combo he threw all night.

The 2-seamer was moving, his curve seemed to be a bit loopy and out of control.  His vaunted circle change wasn’t diving back as much as we’ve seen; he seemed to be gripping it with more of a palm-ball grip instead of the circle change grip and the changeup was coming in straighter than his change last year.  But, it was still coming in and diving down well enough to elude the batters waving at it.

Summary; fantastic outing, as much as we could have hoped for.

Here's a scary nightmare for Nats fans. Photo: Nats official photo day via deadspin.com

Bill Ladson did his seemingly monthly inbox on 8/29/11.  Here’s how i’d have answered the questions he took.

Q: What are your thoughts on Chien-Ming Wang possibly being a part of the rotation next year?

A: I’m not quite ready to say he’s worth considering for one of our 5 rotation spots next year.  We get 6 more starts to decide.  Remember though its not a given that he’ll even be back with us (a topic for an imminent blog post).  Ladson says if he continues to look good there’s a strong possibility he’ll be back.  We’ll see.

Q: Do you think that Prince Fielder is a good fit for the Nationals? I understand that Adam LaRoche has another year guaranteed, but Fielder’s bat is much needed in the middle of the lineup.

A: No, I don’t think Fielder is a good fit.  I think he’s a bad-body, poor defense first baseman who may age badly.  Plus, I don’t think this team is ready or willing to spend that kind of money again, so soon after getting burned on the Werth deal.  Ladson says the last thing they need is another first baseman.  Good point.

Q: Do you think the Nationals should try to re-acquire Alfonso Soriano?

A: Hahahah.  That had to be a joke question. Absolutely not; he’s vastly overpaid, is producing at a fraction of his salary, is a mediocre left fielder at best, and wasn’t exactly Mr. Winner in the clubhouse. The Cubs are stuck with him for the next several years unless they decided to just eat millions of dollars of his salary to pay him to go away.  Ladson: Absolutely not.

Q: I have heard there is a chance that Anthony Rendon would play third base once he gets to the big leagues and Ryan Zimmerman would move to first base. Is this true?

A: I have a hard time believing a player routinely mentioned in the discussion of the best defensive third baseman in the league would be moved by an unproven rookie, no matter what his pedigree or reputation may be.  This isn’t like Mike Bordick moving a secretly awful defensive shortstop in Cal Ripken; this is one of the two or three best positional defenders in the game.  Rendon moves, not Zimmerman.  Ladson says that Rendon will play 3B professionally and will move for Zim.  But, Zim’s contract runs out in 2013 and that’s a great point … where will the team be by then?

Q: Do you think Danny Espinosa can beat out Craig Kimbrel and Freddie Freeman to win the National League Rookie of the Year Award?

A: Not anymore; perhaps if he continued his upward average trend starting in July through the end of the year he could have challenged. But Kimbrel’s great ERA and save totals will get him the win. Atlanta may have the top 3 rookie of the year vote getters (including Beachy) and a leader in next year’s race in Tehran. That team is stacked and built for the future.  Ladson says : no, but that Espinosa should be in the hunt for a gold glove award.

Q: What is your take on Roger Bernadina? He has produced with consistency, especially in the leadoff position, but keeps getting sent down.

A: You think he’s “produced?”   Here’s his career stats; he’s got almost identical numbers in 2011 to his 2010 numbers, and with more than 800 career at bats spread across multiple seasons he’s an 82 OPS+ hitter.  Sorry; you need more production out of a leadoff hitter, or any major league hitter, than that.   He used his last option in 2011 and most likely will be DFA’d after spring training 2012.   Ladson says he’s a tease and thinks he’s no more than a 4th outfielder.

Q: Can you explain the Nats’ fascination with shortstop Ian Desmond, given his regression at the plate this year — lower average, no power?

A: Its all about potential with Desmond.  His UZR/150 is still in the negative range but the team thinks he’s a plus-plus defender.  To his credit, he’s vastly cut down on throwing errors this year.  He has absolutely regressed at the plate.  But the team loves his leadership capabilities.  My take; he’ll be given one more year at SS to become a competent hitter and then Espinosa will take over.  Ladson plays the arbitrary endpoints game and says Desmond has improved since the all-star break.  Yeah, when you’re dead last in the league in OPS you have no place to go but up.

My answers to the questions he took on 7/26/11. I forgot to hit “post” on this and the content has been sitting around for weeks.  As you can see it was a lot of trade deadline talk when everyone thought we were getting a CF.

Q: What happens when Jordan Zimmermann reaches his innings limit? Does he go on the disabled list or will he be kept on the roster?

A: Good question. I’d guess he will get an invented injury if he reaches his limit in mid August, so the team isn’t short handed in the bullpen. Ladson notes that if he lasts til 9/1, rosters expand and there won’t be a need to play DL games.

Q: Would you trade Ian Desmond for Michael Bourn?  Would you trade Desmond, Clippard AND a Prospect for him?

A: If the Astros would take Desmond for Bourn, yeah I probably would make that deal.  I know we’d be selling Desmond short, and he has a lot of leadership qualities, but he’s not hitting the ball (he has one of the 2-3 lowest OPS figures in the league for qualifying hitters).  Anything MORE for Bourn and I think the deal doesn’t make sense for the Nats.   Ladson totes the party line on Desmond…and states that we’re not talking to Houston about Bourn.

Q: Who do you think would be a better fit with the Nationals: Bourn or B.J. Upton?

A: I think both would be good “fits.”  I’d rather have Upton. Upton grew up in Virginia Beach and knows Zimmerman from youth baseball, so he’d already have a friend on the team.  Ladson also notes the local connections with Upton.

Q: What are the chances of the Nationals making a run at Prince Fielder in the upcoming offseason?

A: Pretty high.  Of all the major FAs coming up, he’s a decent risk.  He’s still young and you’d be buying his absolute best years (as opposed to most FA targets, who are already into their 30s and on the decline when they get paid). He may not be the best defensive first baseman but he’d be a big help to the offensively-challenged lineup.  Ladson doesn’t seem to think we’re in the market for Fielder.

Q: What is the future of Chris Marrero, seemingly blocked now by both LaRoche and Morse?

A: Great question.  I think he’s trade bait.  He doesn’t hit well enough to push a 25 homer/100-rbi capable guy like LaRoche off the bag, and Morse is suddenly becoming one of the hottest hitters in the league.  Ladson thinks he’s trade bait.

Q: Did the Nats consider whether Werth could handle the pressures of his contract before they gave it to him?

A: No, and show me a team that DOES do that kind of consideration.  Stars are stars because they perform, not because they’re capable of performing.  Ladson says ask him about Werth in 2 more years.  Great answer.