Nationals Arm Race

Perez's down and out of NY; can he come back with the Nats? Photo: metzilla.com/baseballlatinamerica.com

Word came down on March 21st that the New York Mets had finally given up on Oliver Perez turning his career around and flat out released him.  He had a great 2007 season, going 15-10 in a full season starting for a nifty 121 era+.  Despite coming back down to earth in 2008, the Mets signed him to a 3yr/$36M contract for 2009-11.  He got hurt in 2009, was grossly ineffective in 2010, and now the Mets have decided to eat his entire $12m salary just to be rid of him in 2011.  He was reportedly only throwing in the mid 80s and the Mets were looking at him as a Loogy, not a starter or even a long reliever.

Two days later, Nats fans hear that he’s signed a minor league deal with Washington.  Beat reporters Goessling and Zuckerman nicely summed up similar thoughts to me with respect to this move and what it may mean for the AAA rotation.  But here’s some questions and answers about the move.

Q: Why didn’t the Mets try to trade him? The answer is probably along the lines of, who would want to assume $12M of salary?  Perhaps if the deal was Perez plus $11M for a prospect.  But Perez has looked so bad, his velocity so far below where it used to be, that the Mets probably figured no team would trade anything of value for him.

Q: Why didn’t the Mets just assign him to AAA to keep him? Perez has enough MLB service that he could refuse the assignment and become a free agent, essentially putting him in the exact same spot he is now by virtue of his unconditional release.

Q: Why would the Nats possibly want him? This is a very low risk, low cost move.  Even if he makes the majors we’re not paying anything more than the MLB minimum salary for him (somewhere in the $450k range).  He has already agreed to go to AAA, where he could NOT go for New York.  He can go to AAA, work on his mechanics in a low-stress, low-visibility environment and try to regain what once made him a great prospect.

Q: Is the displacement of other AAA pitchers worth the risk?  Assuming that Perez is treated like a starter, we’re probably now looking at this for the AAA rotation:

• Locks: Maya and Detwiler.  These guys are options 1A and 1B for rising to the majors, and if it were not for option statuses or contracts of the 5 guys who ARE starting in the bigs at least Detwiler may have been up there.
• 40-man guys being given shots: Mock.  For unknown reasons Mock continues to be viewed as part of the future for this team.  But if he’s still being considered a starter, he will be in the AAA rotation.  This list also possibly includes Stammen if the team values him more as a starter than a long-reliever.  We’ll see.  They seem to have him converted to a reliever at this point.
• Rising AA guys/prospects: Arneson, Tatusko, Milone: Arneson was in AAA last year but is not on the 40-man and has lived through two rule5 drafts.  He didn’t pitch badly in 2010 but not flashy enough to warrant a look at the MLB level.  Tatusko put up great AA numbers and deserves a shot in AAA.  Milone (and to a lesser extent perhaps even Meyers or Roark) also pitched well enough in AA to be thinking about a move to AAA.
• Non 40-man Vets hanging on: Chico, Martin, Martis, Atilano.   And now add Perez to this list.

So what happens?  I think your AAA rotation will be Maya, Detwiler, Mock, Perez and Tatusko.  Arneson gets bumped to long relief, as does Stammen, Chico, and Martis.  Martin and Atilano may be out of a job.  Milone, Meyers and Roark start in AA with a mindset of rising quickly to replace a promoted starter, or to replace Perez if we give up on him.

Is signing Perez worth delaying the AAA promotion of Milone?  Probably not.  But I agree with putting Perez into the rotation at the expense of any one of Chico, Martin, Martis or Atilano.  I think these latter four guys basically need to be released to make room for the next wave of guys.  If all four passed through waivers and came back to Washington, then there seems to be little chance they will be making it as professionals much longer.

Conclusions: I don’t HATE this move for the Nats.  It is low cost and low risk.  Lets just hope it does not retard the growth of our slew of good-looking AA pitchers.

Rodriguez's tenure as a Nat has been so rough so far, I can't even find a picture wearing our uniform. Photo: Ezra Shaw/Getty Images via bleacherreport.com

When the Nationals traded Josh Willingham for power arm Henry Rodriguez and minor league outfielder Corey Brown in December, the team and its fans thought we were getting a good outfielder prospect plus a valuable power arm, back of the bullpen type in exchange for a defensively challenged left fielder who couldn’t stay healthy (that is certainly the glass-is-half-empty analysis of Willingham’s contributions to this team, but so be it).

Brown was always set to repeat AAA, having struggled there last year after dominating lower levels of the minors.  He still may feature in our outfield at some point if our slew of LF/CF options fail us and he plays well to start the season.  His ankle injury certainly is not helping him prepare for 2011, but he’s not the real prize of the Willingham trade.

Rodriguez, after showing up for spring training 2 weeks late and not getting into a game for another week, is now “being shelved” to work on his mechanics.  A week before opening day.  Here’s his stats for the spring thus far: 2 1/3 innings, 7.71 era, 3 hits, 3 walks and only about half the pitches he’s thrown being in the strike zone.  The coaching staff report that his mechanics are out of whack, that he cannot repeat his delivery and he’s been doing nothing but bullpen work for the past 5 days.

Great.

Rodriguez has no minor league options.  The Athletics knew this and the Nationals knew this upon trading their starting left fielder, #5 hitter and top OPS producer from 2010.  Now this roster inflexibility is set to cause a serious issue for this team.  We can’t just “invent” an injury for Rodriguez to store him on the DL; last time I checked my orthopaedic surgeon didn’t treat “mechanical flaw” as an injury.  So, instead of leaving someone deserving on the opening day roster (say, Collin Balester or even Drew Storen, not that he’s been 100% deserving based on his spring performance but remember he did appear in 50+ games last year rather effectively, especially for a rookie), we’re going to probably lug him around for a while and look for incredibly low-priority outings for him to “remember” how to pitch again.

I know all of Willingham’s faults.  He’s injury prone, he was arbitration eligible and his salary was escalating, he hasn’t ever played a full season without time off for injuries.  More importantly to Rizzo, he was a severe defensive liability, even in a position that traditionally can “hide” poor defenders.  And Rizzo from the onset has seemed dead set on fielding a team of track stars, no matter what the cost.

But none of those reasons factor in the most important point; Willingham can mash the ball.  In two seasons in Washington he had OPS+ figures of 129 and 127 (which would have ranked him about 20th in the NL had he qualified each year) and hit in the 5th hole protecting Adam Dunn admirably.  You don’t just give up that much offense unless you KNOW you’re getting something of equal value in return.

Right now, we’re not getting anything close to equal value for him.  And it may have larger ramifications for the team that breaks camp in a week or so.

Commenter Mark L, in response to my statement that (paraphrased) the 2011 Nationals cannot afford to keep rule 5 picks on this team, pointed out that the team really has little chance of competing in 2011 and thus it is really the perfect time to be keeping and testing rule5 guys.

In theory I agree with this premise w.r.t. keeping rule 5 guys.  We’re not going to win the pennant in 2011.

I think in reality though the team has gone mostly backwards since arriving here in 2005 and cannot afford to ever seem as if they’re not trying to make progress.  I blame a lot of that on Bowden’s obsession with former Reds and tools-y players who became such a nightmare to integrate as a team that Acta had to be scuttled as a manager in favor of the more old-school Riggleman. The team lost the entirety of good will and excitement that came with a new stadium and the Lerners as owners had to be shocked at how quickly they destroyed their season ticket base (most observers believe they’ve lost more than half their season ticket holders just from 2009!). So the team is just not in a position to play for the future any more; they have to appear to be improving the team even marginally for the next few years to put themselves in a better position financially.

If the team was really playing for 2013 (as, say, the KC Royals clearly are), they’d never have even brought in the likes of Ankiel, Coffey, Hairston, basically every mid-career veteran and go completely with a lineup of prospects and these rule5 guys.   Arguably they wouldn’t have spent the money on Werth either.  What would the 25-man roster really look like without any FA signings?  Lets take a look:

• Catchers: Pudge, Ramos (remember, they *had* to get Pudge b/c of the state of their catcher depth pre 2010).  If you like, you can replace Pudge with someone like Flores or even Maldonado, since Norris is not ready for the majors in 2011.

• Infield: Marrero, Espinosa, Desmond, Zimmerman backed up by Gonzalez and Lombardozzi.  This would have required a serious leap of faith on the readiness of Marrero for 2011, and we’d be rushing Lombardozzi to the majors.  Perhaps we would have replaced Lombardozzi with Bixler.

• Outfield: Bernadina, Morgan, Burgess, Morse and CBrown.  I know Burgess was traded, but perhaps the team keeps him and installs him in right field knowing they wouldn’t have Werth.  Perhaps Burgess and Morse compete for right field and we bring up newly acquired CBrown as the 5th outfielder.

• Starters: Maya, Detwiler, Livan, Lannan, Zimmermann.  I leave Livan in here if only because we signed him to such a sweetheart deal.  If we don’t count Livan, we’re looking at someone like Stammen, Mock, Detwiler or Chico in that 5th spot.  Or perhaps we use Broderick as the 5th starter instead of putting him in long relief.

• Relievers: Storen, Clippard, Burnett, Slaten, Broderick, HRodriguez and Carr/Kimball (with ERodriguez on DL).  Our bullpen would have hard throwers at the back end and we’d immediately give AFL hero Kimball or Carr a shot.

Of this active roster, 17-18 would be on pre-arbitration salaries and the total payroll would probably be in the $28-30M range for the entire team. It’d be the “right” thing to do but the town would absolutely howl in protest.

I dunno. I go back and forth as a fan. Part of me says screw 2011, play the kids, see what they can do this year and regroup for 2012 when you can have a very good Strasburg-Zimmermann 1-2 punch to go along with general improvement across the rest of our younger guys.  The other part of me says that incremental growth in terms of wins and respectability for this team is just as important in terms of attracting free agents and enabling the team to make a quick leap in a couple years. If this team can win 75 games this year, Strasburg comes back and probably improves the team 5 wins just by himself, we acquire an incrementally better #3 pitcher and hope that Maya, Detwiler and our rising AAA guys become real major league options. If you’re a 81 win team a couple of key free agent signings coupled with the natural rise of our core up and coming players can improve the team 10-12 wins very quickly. Suddenly we’re a 90 win team and still have a manageable payroll to augment and take the next steps to rise above Atlanta and Philadelphia in the division.

That’s “the plan,” right?

There is always a risk of over-emphasizing early spring training statistics.  But as an analyst or even a fan of a team, you’re in a catch 22.  There are players out there clearly pitching to make the team and thus their statistics and results are important.  Meanwhile, you have to keep in mind that for every homer Mike Morse hits off a legitimate major league starter, he’s hitting another one off a guy who is a non-40 man minor league filler player who is pitching that game just to fill out the innings.  So, when looking at these results we try to put the performance into context.  If a pitcher is going against a split squad and is facing 3 regulars and 6 minor leaguers, his performance obviously has a caveat.

In the 3rd week of spring training though, starters are getting “stretched out” and the teams are starting to look more like what they will in the regular season.  So the good/bad/inconclusive starts to be more important.  The Nats also managed to lose 6 of these 7 games, a troubling sign for the beginning of our season.

Here’s links to Week 1 and Week 2‘s Good/Bad/Inconclusive posts.  And below are the links to running commentaries (when available), wrap-ups from beat reporters and box scores (if I can find them):

• 3/13: at Marlins (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/14: vs Tigers (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/15: at Mets (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/16: at Astros (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/17: at Braves (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/18: vs Cardinals (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/19: at Mets (ss) (running blog/gamer/box score)

The Good

• Doug Slaten: he had nice rebound appearance against the Tigers on 3/14.  If he mis-fires, we always have Ron Villone (kidding. Maybe.)
• Tom Gorzelanny: looked significantly improved on 3/15 over his first appearance.  Final line; 4 IP, 2 H, 1 R, 3 BB, 4 K, 65 pitches, 36 strikes.  He clearly tired in the last inning, issuing two of the three walks and the run.  No radar gun readings to be found but the observers say he looked like a completely different pitcher.  Good.
• Brian Broderick: two quick, easy outings later in the week gives him only 1 earned run in 10 2/3 innings this spring.  He’s looking like a steal of a rule5 pick and may just make this team as the long-man.  Or perhaps at the expense of Drew Storen (see further down).

The Bad

• Elvin Ramirez: this rule-5 acquisition has yet to appear in a game and now has a sore-shoulder that may necessitate his starting the season on the DL.  I know that Rule-5 draft picks are low-risk and low-cost, but on a team like the Nationals they don’t make a lot of sense.  We’re not deep enough so that we can “hide” a guy all year (as we did with Tony Blanco back in 2005), and there are more deserving pitchers on this team for the few spots that aren’t guaranteed.  Perhaps we can negotiate a trade with the Mets to keep him if the team really likes him.  More likely he starts the year on the DL and gets returned if we cannot negotiate a deal.
• Craig Stammen‘s 3/15 outing was probably enough to guarantee his trip to Syracuse.  He gave up 3 runs on 4 hits and a walk against a decent Mets lineup.  He’s looking like 4th best out of 4 for the last bullpen spot.
• Tyler Clippard: His 3/16 outing was seriously disturbing.  1ip, gave up 4  hits (3 for extra bases), 2 walks, 5 runs … a disaster.  He was quoted as saying that he “lost his concentration” but one would have to think that after perhaps the third or fourth baserunner he’d get it back in a hurry.  He wasn’t exactly facing the elite of the league either in the 9th inning against (possibly) the worst team in the majors.
• Drew Storen: after a bounce back performance earlier in the week, Storen gets absolutely hammered by a bunch of Cardinals scrubs you’ve never heard of on 3/18.  Not good.  I’m beginning to wonder if he even makes the team at this rate.

The Inconclusive/Worrisome/Concerning

• Henry Rodriguez: On March 13th our possible-closer-acquisition pitcher was FINALLY set to appear in a game.  He promptly lays an egg; 1/3 of an inning, 3 walks and a hit.  Clocked at 97 though, so there’s that.  Management has to be irritated with this situation; the guy has no minor league options and is basically guaranteed to be on the team, yet misses weeks of camp and shows up not in full throwing shape.  If this guy bombs out (as the centerpiece of the Josh Willingham deal), we’ll have given up an awful lot of offense for next to nothing.  In his next appearance on 3/17, he looked remarkably better; got his fastball up to 99, threw a couple wild pitches but got some Ks on a great 90mph change-up.  Most described him as “effectively wild.”  Which is the real Rodriguez?
• Colin Balester: Why has Balester only gotten 5 innings in 2 weeks?  His role on this team (presumably to me) is to be the long-man out of the bullpen, the Miguel Batista role from last year.  He’s being treated more like an 7th/8th inning guy.  Is this indicative of his lowered chances of making this team?  Perhaps the plan is to have option-less Gorzelanny in that role with Balester back in AAA (he has one option left).  He did pitch 2 scoreless on 3/19 to finish up the week but seems destined for AAA to start the year.
• Ross Detwiler took a step back from his spring performances on 3/16 with this line: 3 IP, 4 H, 3 R, 2 ER, 2 BB, 71p, 43 strikes.  He gave up 4 consecutive base-runners, struggled with a basic sacrifice attempt from the opposing pitcher, and reportedly wasn’t as crisp with his fastball velocity as in days past.  Perhaps just an off day.
• Yunesky Maya: He showed nearly the velocity we want out of him on 3/17 against a strong Braves lineup (peaking at 92, sitting between 88-91 mostly).  Not quite the 93 we were told he was hitting in the DWL but perhaps he was on a fast gun.  He fell victim to that which plagued him last year; the big inning.  He needs to find a way to mitigate the damage if he gets down in an inning.
• Jordan Zimmermann: 5 scoreless innings on 3/13 to run his spring training streak to 11.  Good velocity, good movement on his curve.  His 3/18 Outing was not as nice: 4 ip, 6 runs, 8 hits, 2 walks, 0 strikeouts, 2 wp, 69 pitches and 44 strikes.  He was reportedly very wild and very hittable.
• Jason Marquis: He continued his great spring, goes 5 IP, 1 ER, 3 H, 2 BB, 4 K, 53 pitches, 38 strikes against the tigers on 3/14.  And then he got absolutely hammered on 3/19, giving up 9 hits and 3 walks in less than 4 innings (3.2 IP, 6 ER, 9 H, 3 BB, 1 K, 1 WP, 79 pitches, 45 strikes).  The first inning of 3/19 seemed to be part bad defense, part unlucky grounder locations, but he did have trouble locating his pitches all game.

Lots of “inconclusive” this week, as guys who looked good before put in bad performances.  Lots of pitchers complain about a “dead arm” period late in spring training and perhaps that’s what we’re seeing overall.  Next week’s games will be revealing.

Brian Broderick on Media Day. Photo by Al Bello/Getty Images North America/zimbio.com

Commenter Mark L asked whether or not I was “ignoring” rule-5 draftee Brian Broderick‘s performance thus far when considering the bullpen competition in response to a post previewing the Nats 3/15/11 game against the Mets.

I don’t know if i’m “ignoring” Broderick’s performances thus far … I just have a reaaaaaaly hard time believing he’ll be on the 25-man roster based on the inflexibility of keeping a rule5 guy, given the roster inflexibilities we already have with several other players.  Here’s my reasoning:

• We have 3 guys who already essentially HAVE to stay on the 25-man roster because of a lack of options: Clippard, Burnett, and Henry Rodriguez.  Two of these guys are bullpen mainstays and would have been there anyway, but the acquisition of Rodriguez has complicated matters for the team.  As mentioned before, he showed up late for spring training and has not necessarily looked fantastic so far.  If we could possibly find a way to DL him if he’s not ready to go on April 2nd (“tired arm?”) , a lot of problems would be avoided.
• We have a 4th guy in Coffey who signed a major league deal and has enough service time that he could (and probably would) refuse a AAA assignment, so he either stays on the 25-man roster or we light his $1.35M on fire.
• We have to have a loogy; Slaten seems almost certain to be that guy.  I guess you could argue that we really don’t need a loogy, that Burnett could be that guy or even Gorzelanny if he gets bumped out of the rotation.  But Burnett’s value is not as a one-out guy and Gorzelanny is a starter.
• Storen is supposed to be “the closer.” He may be struggling this spring but there’s nothing about his 2010 performance that says he does NOT deserve to be in that position for this team. Admittedly he does have options and can be sent down but i’d be awfully mad if we sent a first round draft pick down so we could keep some untested minor leaguer on the active roster.

So, if we keep Broderick, he’s the 7th guy in the pen and has to stay there all season.

That’s your 7 spots essentially wrapped up. So now here’s the rest of the picture and why this could become rather complicated for the team:

• If Gorzelanny struggles in the starter’s role, he has no options and would have to go to the bullpen. Who makes way?  We can’t really cut Gorzelanny out right without admitting that the move backfired greatly for the team, having given up 3 decent prospects just a few months ago.
• If we want to use Gaudin, who has looked great so far in spring training, he’d have to be first added to 40-man (and then we’d have to drop someone else or move them to 60-day dl). And then he’s more or less stuck on the roster too; he’s got 5+ years of service time, no options and can reject an assignment back to AAA. Based on the fact that he signed a minor league deal with us, one could assume that he is ok with starting the season in AAA, but other teams have scouts too and might be taking notice of his achievements so far.  However again, if Gaudin is the 7th guy who makes way for him?
• Balester: he certainly performed well last year; 28ks in 21 ip in the same role we’re talking about here.  Before the rule5 draft I had him locked into that long-man role. Has he done anything this spring to cost him this spot?  No but he has one more minor league option and may lose out nonetheless.
• Stammen; he clearly can give you innings since he’s always been a starter, and his advanced stats last year were not THAT bad. But he too has options and seems to be pitching his way to AAA this spring.

Honestly, I think what the Nats need to do is make a deal with StL, trade them someone for Broderick and then stash him at AAA til you need him. Return him to the starters role where he was 11-2 last year in AA and maybe we’ve found a real cheap 5th starter for the future.

Per new Washington Times beat reporter Amanda Comak’s post this morning, here’s today’s pitching lineup:

SP – Tom Gorzelanny – 1 start, 2.1 innings, 5 H, 3 R (2 ER), 3 BB, 1 K, 7.71 ERA
RHP Craig Stammen – 6 IP, 5 H, 1 R (1ER), 2 BB, 5 K, 1.50 ERA
RHP Henry Rodriguez – 0.1 IP, 1 H, 1 R (1ER), 3 BB, 27.00 ERA (keep in mind he’s only made one appearance)
RHP Brian Broderick – 7.2 IP, 4 H, 1 R (1ER), 0 BB, 1 K, 1.17 ERA
RHP Collin Balester – 5 IP, 5 H, 3 R (2ER), 2 BB, 4 K, 3.60 ERA
RHP Cole Kimball – 6 IP, 4 H, 1 R (1ER), 1 HB, 1 BB, 5 K, 1.50 ERA

Nearly every guy on this list has some serious question marks in terms of performance thus far in the Spring.  Gorzelanny almost certainly has a rotation spot guaranteed but has not shown us nearly the capabilities he was known for pre-trade.  Stammen‘s role with this team and his future with the organization is cloudy; clearly he’s not being considered as a starter any more but there’s way too many guys for a bullpen role.  Rodriguez showed up late, has no options and is pretty much guaranteed a bullpen spot … so he better be worth it.  Broderick is a rule5 guy on a team that absolutely cannot afford to keep a rule5 guy (making you wonder why bother to pick them up?), but he’s looked good this spring and you have to wonder if he’s going to be acquired or kept at this point. Balester (like Stammen) seems to be falling behind in the race for the long-man out of the bullpen competition, which is odd considering his very good 2010 numbers.

Only Kimball seems destined to know his fate already; he’s bound for the AAA closer role, having performed admirably at both high-A and AA last year.  It is only a matter of time before he gets called up and slots into the back of our bullpen.

Can’t wait to hit refresh on that #Nats twitter tag!

A running post, my answering the questions that Nats MLB beat writer Bill Ladson answers on a (mostly) weekly basis.  here’s Ladson’s 3/14/11 mailbox post with his answers.

Q: Is it too early to say Drew Storen lost his chance of being the team’s closer?
A: I think it was too early to say this even last year, when Storen was good but not fantastic in the closer role.  We wouldn’t have acquired a 103mph throwing Henry Rodriguez otherwise.  I think Storen *eventually* gets the role but until then its a mix between him, Tyler Clippard and Rodriguez depending on the night.  Riggleman likes to give relievers their assignments for the night ahead of time and seems certain to go closer-by-committee.

Q: Why do the Nationals keep taking chances on injured pitchers like Chien-Ming Wang and Cla Meredith, when a guy like Kevin Millwood is available?
A: Because Millwood was awful last year?  4-16, 5.10 era and an 83 ERA+.  Though he was effective in 2009, his 07 and 08 numbers were in line with his 2010 numbers.  2010 was the last year of a 5yr/$60M contract.  If the Yankees, who *desperately* need starters, aren’t biting on Millwood (or even Jeremy Bonderman) at this point then nobody will.  Besides, I’d much rather pay a 22-yr old prospect the major league minimum to put up a 5.00 era and a mid-80s ERA+rather than a veteran who would command 2-3 times more at a minimum.

Wang is a special case; I think the Nats spent the $1M guaranteed this year as a follow-on to their $2M investment last year.  $3M is a good gamble on a pitcher who won 19 games two years in a row in the AL East.  Meredith (i’m pretty sure) was NOT injured coming into the season, and his TJ diagnosis was a surprise.  He’s already released and should have only cost the team a few thousand in spring training stipends and meal monies.

By and large, it seems that you can gamble with one injury reclamation project per spring.  And they are good gambles; the league is filled with pitchers who have returned from major injuries on non-guaranteed contracts to contribute.

Q: With the Nationals signing first baseman Adam LaRoche to a two-year deal, have they lost faith in Chris Marrero, and should they consider trading him at this point?
A: It is a fair point.  I think the Nats got stuck between two situations; Marrero not being ready for a full time major league gig for 2011 and a quality first baseman not wanting to come here on a one-year deal.  So they bought 2 years of LaRoche and probably cost Marrero a year of development time.  They have not lost faith in him … but to rise to the majors as a first baseman you have to have 30+ homer power.  This isn’t the 80s when a skinny Don Mattingly-like first baseman can arise and prosper.  You need production out of that position.  Until Marrero displays that, he’s stuck in the minors.

Q: If Danny Espinosa starts off the season cold, who will come in as the second baseman?
A: Nobody, really.  The team is basically all in on both Desmond and Espinosa to start 150+ games at their respective positions this year.  Alberto Gonzalez is not a lock to make this team versus Alex Cora, and neither can really hit a lick.  Jerry Hairston can backfill but is no more than a role player at this point in his career.  There is a significant gap from the majors to our 2nd base prospects Kobernus (who has not played like a 2nd rounder at all) and Lombardozzi (who played well in the AFL but is still needing minor league time).  We all better cross our fingers these guys don’t get hurt or struggle badly.

Q: Do you see Jerry Hairston Jr. taking significant at-bats away from Espinosa and Ian Desmond — potentially retarding their progress?
A: Not at all; once-a-week starter and late inning defensive replacement to spell their legs during the grind.

Q: How can you be even remotely upbeat about Morgan? His base-running decisions last year were terrible and his foot speed is supposed to be his biggest offensive threat. I like the guy’s heart, but I doubt he’ll be anything but a disappointment this year.
A: I believe Morgan will break camp as the leadoff hitter/center fielder, but will probably only be given about 2-3 weeks to show he’s back on track at the plate before the team goes with Rick Ankiel or Roger Bernadina in center.  If this happens, Morgan’s time in the majors may be close to complete; he’s 30, has a history of behavioral issues from last year, and isn’t getting any faster or younger.

Q: Are you surprised that Laynce Nix is facing an uphill battle to make the Nationals’ 25-man roster?
A: Why would anyone be surprised that an outfielder on a non-guaranteed contract is having problems making a team with 5 outfielders on major league contracts?  Nix’s success was always insurance over the likes of Morse and Ankiel not working out.  If a team wants to trade for him, all the better.  He doesn’t exactly fit the Mike Rizzo defense-first profile of outfielders as it is.

Marquis has looked arguably the best of any starter this spring. Photo: AP/silive.com

After the 2nd week of games and the official halfway point of Spring Training, here’s some quick comments on how some various pitchers have looked in the second week of Spring Training Games.  I’ve been keeping running commentary all week as each game happens.  The link to my week one’s thoughts/observations is here, posted on 3/6.

Also, here’s perma- links to the NatsJournal blog‘s running game comments as well as box scores (when I could find them).

• 3/6: vs Braves, box score
• 3/7: vs Astros, box score
• 3/8: at the Mets, box score
• 3/9: at the Marlins, box score
• 3/10: split squad vs the Mets (box score), and at Astros (box score)
• 3/11: vs Astros (box score)
• 3/12: vs Yankees (box score)

The Good

• Jason Marquis: 4 ip, 2 hits and a walk against Atlanta on 3/9 to continue his scoreless inning streak further into spring training.  Lots of ground balls, meaning he has his sinker back.
• Adam Carr: 6 up and 6 down on 3/8.  This didn’t stop him from being cut from the major league squad, but a bright future awaits this fellow.
• Brian Broderick: continues to pitch well, but his Rule5 status complicates his ability to make this team (see my whole missive on Gorzelanny and his job-by-option-status post here).
• Cole Kimball: big time right handed power pitcher showing his worth by continuing to punch guys out with regularity.  Could be first in line to replace a bullpen member who goes down with injury or non-performance.
• Ross Detwiler: Struck out 5 in 3 innings against a strong Braves lineup on 3/6.  Stretched out to 4 innings on 3/11 and added a few more K’s (along with a couple runs) but reportedly looked decent.  I agree with a couple other bloggers on this point; we talk about how Detwiler is competing for the 5th spot, but is it really Lannan that is in trouble?  (see further down for Lannan comments).
• Todd Coffey: Struck out the side on 3/9, had 2 more K’s in a 1-2-3 inning on 3/7.  Looks like he may be a decent replacement for Batista/Peralta from last year’s bullpen.
• Chad Gaudin: looked good against a very weak Mets team 3/10, pitching 5 shutout innings scattering a few hits and walks  (final numbers: 5ip, 6K, allows 4 hits with a walk. 78 pitches 52 strikes, thanks to Craig Heist).  Despite this he has no chance at the MLB rotation.  I presume he’ll be in the AAA rotation to start the season and seems to be putting himself above other AAA starters such as Chico and Martis in the pecking order.

The Bad

• Atahualpa Severino: bombed on 3/8, he’s looking like he’s gonna be 2nd best in the Loogy race to Slaten.  He’s already been optioned to AAA and may be vulnerable to being removed from the 40-man roster.  That being said…
• Doug Slaten got rocked himself on 3/9.  He’ll be given some room since he was so successful last year, but we need one of these two guys to own that Loogy role.  We don’t want to waste Burnett on man-to-man matchups.  In other news, the Nats signed Ron Villone to a minor league deal this week, which i’m predicting is partly (as Kilgore says) because they like him and part Loogy insurance.
• Garrett Mock: didn’ t help his cause by giving up a bomb against the Astros.  He’s now given up 4 hits and 5 walks in 2ip.  He’s looking like AAA bullpen fodder and possibly not long for the 40-man.  I don’t care how good his “stuff” is; if he can’t compete against fringy roster guys in the middle innings of a spring training game, then he cannot be counted on in real games come April.  Update: cut from the major league squad and will get into the AAA rotation.
• John Lannan:  Did not look good in his 3/12 start; too many walks and too many hard hit balls.  For the spring he’s sporting nearly a 9.00 ERA.  With Detwiler looking so strong, is Lannan in peril of starting the season in the minors?

The Iffy or Possibly Concerning.

• Jordan Zimmerman‘s 3/8 start “looked” good but those on hand used words like “shaky” and “hit hard.”  His fastball was 92-94 though.  For Zimmermann, the velocity is the key.  We know he has good stuff; we just need to know his fastball is recovered from TJ surgery.
• Yunesky Maya‘s 3/7 start was shaky at best.  5  hits and a walk in 2 2/3s innings versus a weaker Astro’s lineup.  He threw again on 3/12, gave up an unearned run and seemed to struggle with his fastball locations (the unearned run was on a 3-base error that Cano smoked but Bernadina dropped).  He pitched 4 complete, gave up 2 hits, walked 3 and struck out 3 (some with his loopy 12-6 curve ball).
• Drew Storen got lit up again on 3/7 but we had word that the coaches told him to spot his fastball.  Well, that may explain why.  Hey McCatty; tell us when he’s really trying out there so we know what is going on.  He recovered for a decent outing on 3/10, punctuated with 3 straight Ks against AAA competition.
• Tom Gorzelanny: my post questioning his acquisition garnered quite a spirited response.  The comments i’m about to make probably will too.  His first outing in the spring did not exactly vindicate his nearly-guaranteed active roster spot.  His line: 2.1 IP, 3 R, 2 ER, 5 H, 3 BB, 1 K against a weakened Astros split squad.   He only managed 23 strikes in 47 pitches.  Nobody seems to have mph readings but he was clocked only in the upper 80s earlier this week.  For him to stick and be successful we need to see a return to 92-93.
• Livan Hernandez: his 3/11 start did not garner confidence, apparently getting hit all around the park.  Bad defense behind him (and some generous scoring) made his line (3ip, 7hits, 1bb, 1k, 3ER) look worse than it was.  We know that Livan will put up a stinker every once in a while; just can’t make it a habit.

Clay Buchholz provided the best Wins/salary in the majors last year. Photo baseballrumormill.com

A few weeks back si’s Tom Verducci posted an article discussing the value of starters over closers.  One of the points that he made in the article related to the general fact that Ace Starters are more likely to be with the same team that developed them than being free agent acquisitions in the modern game.  In Verducci’s article, he analyzed the 20 best pitchers by ERA from last season and found that 13 of them are still with their original organization.  Furthermore, 10 of them were first round draft picks.

Modern baseball teams are being built more and more through the draft.  Last year’s World Series champions San Francisco featured 4 home grown starters, each of whom would slot in as the best or 2nd best pitcher on most every other rotation in the league.  Tampa Bay rode a slew of home-grown (and cheap!) starters to the 2nd best record in Baseball over the past 3 years.  And now we clearly see Mike Rizzo trying to build up his starting pitcher cache in the minors through mid-season trades and a focus on pitching in the past couple drafts.

I thought I’d take this point a bit further, as it relates to a topic that I have found more and more fascinating.  The New York Yankees and their $200M payroll struggled to find starting pitching in the off season and are now essentially conducting tryouts in spring training for the #4 and #5 starter spots in their rotation.  How did they find themselves in this predicament?  The answer is thus; it has been years since they developed a home-grown Ace starter.  Their best pitcher (CC Sabathia) was a (very) expensive Free Agent, their 2nd best a home grown rookie (Phil Hughes) and their third best (AJ Burnett) another pricey free agent.  Arguably it has been since either Chien-Ming Wang or possibly Andy Pettitte that the Yankees have developed a starter worthy of mention.  Now, the Yankees have certainly bought themselves a whole lot of offense that will mask their weaknesses in the rotation, but the fact remains that they could easily miss the playoffs in 2011 despite their payroll if the first three members of their rotation do not pitch well.

Lets look at the “Aces” in baseball, and take a look at their acquisition methods and their contract status.  Here, “Home Grown” means the team that developed the pitcher, not necessarily the team that drafted him.  When prospects get traded, I credit the acquiring team for developing and delivering the player to the majors.

• Home Grown: Johnson, Hamels, Wainwright, Jimenez, Lincecum, Cain, Lester, Buchholz, Price, Verlander, Liriano, Felix Hernandez, Jered Weaver.
• Free Agent Acquisition: Halladay, Lee, Carpenter, Sabathia.
• Trade Acquisition: Oswalt, Santana, Greinke.

Of these 20 “Aces,” 13 are still with their developing organization.  Four Free Agent acquisitions for big money, and three traded Aces that cost their teams plenty (though in retrospect the Johan Santana trade isn’t looking that bad for the Mets).

Another side-point was Verducci’s findings that 10 of the top 20 pitchers by ERA last year were first rounders.  I find that piece of information really amazing, given the notorious “crapshoot” mentality of baseball Drafts.  Here’s a quick followup analysis of the Initial Acquisition method of my 20 “Aces” and determining draft or international free agent. Here, we’ll put “supplemental first rounders) into the “1st round” category.

• Draft: 1st Rounder: Hamels, Halladay, Carpenter, Wainwright, Greinke, Lincecum, Cain, Buchholz, Price, Sabathia, Verlander, Jered Weaver.
• Draft: top 5 rounds: Johnson (4th), Lee (4th), Lester (2nd).
• Draft: 6th round or later: Oswalt (23rd).
• International Free Agents: Santana, Jimenez, Liriano, Felix Hernandez.

So by my analysis, 12 of the best 20 pitchers in the game were first round picks.  Only Oswalt looks like a complete diamond in the rough find.  For all the talk about how the draft is a crap shoot (hey, Albert Pujols was a 13th round pick), it really seems apparent that these first rounders paid off handsomely.

Here’s one more look; of the 13 “home grown” aces, lets look at their current contract status.  All data per Cot’s fantastic salary database site.

• Johnson: 4 years/$39M (2010-13)
• Hamels: 3 years/$20.5M (2009-11), but he has a 4th arbitration year in 2012.
• Wainwright: 4 years/$15M (2008-11), plus 2012, 2013 club options (this contract is in complete peril though, since the club can terminate at the end of 2011 when Wainwright is on the DL.  That essentially kills $21M guaranteed to Wainwright in 2012 and 2013.  Tough, tough break for the player).
• Jimenez: 4 years/$10M (2009-12), plus 2013-14 club options (the club options are very reasonable for an Ace)
• Lincecum: 2 years/$23M (2010-11), but these are just his first two arbitration years.  Two more to go to take him through 2013.
• Cain: 3 years/$27.25M (2010-12)
• Lester: 5 years/$30M (2009-13), plus 2014 club option
• Buchholz: 1yr/$480K (est): Still on a pre-arbitration contract, possibly the best value in baseball right now.  Controlled through 2014 by the Red Sox.
• Price: 6 years/$8.5M (2007-12).  Wait, actually THIS may be the best deal in baseball, since Buchholz will probably garner a massive first-year arbitration award in 2012 just as Price’s 6 year deal ends.  However, Price can void the contract and file for arbitration as soon as he becomes eligible, presumably for the 2012 season.
• Verlander: 5 years/$80M (2010-14)
• Liriano: 1 year/$4.3M (2011).  Still in his arbitration years, under club control through 2012.
• Felix Hernandez: 5 years/$78M (2010-14)
• Jered Weaver: 1 year/$7.37M (2011).  He lost his arbitration hearing this year after going “only” 13-12 but leading the league in strikeouts and coming in 5th in Cy Young voting.  Under club control through 2012.

And, adding in the non-home grown players for a complete picture of the future Ace starter FA market:

• Halladay: 3 years/$60M (2011-13), plus 2014 option
• Lee: 5 years/$120M (2011-15), plus 2016 option
• Carpenter: 5 years/$63.5M (2007-11), plus 2012 club option
• Sabathia: 7 years/$161M (2009-15) but he can opt out after the 2011 season
• Oswalt: 5 years/$73M (2007-11), plus 2012 club option
• Santana: 6 years/$137.5M (2008-13), plus 2014 club option
• Greinke: 4 years/$38M (2009-12)

So, here’s a quick summary of when these Aces may hit the FA market:

• After 2011: Wainwright (but he’ll be post-TJ surgery), Sabathia (probably)
• After 2012: Cain, Liriano, Weaver, Oswalt, Carpenter, Greinke, Hamels
• After 2013: Johnson, Lincecum, Santana (probably)
• 2014 or Beyond : Jimenez, Lester, Buchholz, Price, Verlander, Hernandez, Halladay, Lee

Notice how teams are locking up these Ace pitchers for the long haul.  We’re likely to have perhaps just an injury reclamation project in Adam Wainwright and opt-out 100% certain to return to the Yankees Sabathia as the sole major  free agent candidates this coming off season.  I’ve read differing opinions on whether or not Sabathia opts out of his contract (he’d be abandoning $92M of guaranteed pay over 4 years) but I’d be surprised (shocked actually) if he did NOT opt out, especially if he has a third consecutive year of similar production to his first two for the Yankees.  You would have to think he could easily merit a contract north of Cliff Lee’s $24M/year for 7 additional years.  7yrs/$170M or so.

Lastly, lets look at the 8 playoff teams from last  year and investigate how many of their starters were home grown:

• Giants: 4 of 5 homegrown (Lincecum, Cain, Sanchez, Bumgarner).  1 FA in Zito
• Rangers: 3 of 5 home grown (Wilson, Hunter, Feldman), 1 trade acquisition (Lee), and one FA (Lewis)
• Yankees: 1 home grown (Hughes) and 4 Free Agents (Sabathia, Burnett, Pettitte, Vazquez)
• Phillies: 1 home grown (Hamels), 3 traded acquisitions (Halladay, Oswalt, Blanton) one FA (Moyer).
• Rays: 4 home grown (Sheilds, Neiman, Price, Davis) one trade acquisition (Garza)
• Twins: 3 home grown (Baker, Blackburn, Slowey) one FA (Pavano) and one trade acquisition (Liriano).
• Braves: 3 home grown (Hanson, Jurrgens, Medlen/Minor), one FA (Lowe), one trade acquisition (Hudson)
• Reds: 3 home grown (Leake, Bailey/Wood, Cueto), two trade acquisitions (Arroyo and Harang).

Six of the Eight playoff team used rotations that were mostly home grown.  Most of the trade acquisitions here were trading of prospects (either the acquiring team using prospects to acquire a proven Vet, as with Hudson, or the acquiring team acquiring and developing the player, as with Garza).

What is the lesson, after all this analysis?  Draft well, develop well, and then lock down your Aces for the long haul.  That is the pathway to success.  There are some exceptions of course (the Phillies have acquired 2 Aces by leveraging their very good farm system depth, and still have enough lower-level depth to rank among the best farm systems in baseball.  And the Yankees of course have bought themselves a good portion of their team).  But looking at the playoff teams last year, most of them were draft-heavy on starters.

Coincidentally; the Nats 2011 rotation by way of comparison?  2 drafted (Lannan, Zimmermann), 2 FAs (Livan and Marquis) and one trade acquisition candidate (Gorzelanny).  This would look far better of course if we were using two key drafted/developed players (Strasburg, Detwiler or even Maya).

Here’s hoping that the Nats’ higher-end starting pitcher draft picks (Strasburg, Zimmermann Solis, Cole, and Detwiler) become the core of our rotation for years to come.