Correct. I'm saying they're planning to take Harper, but plans can obviously change. That's different than saying they've made a decision.
Your piece makes sense, though to my knowledge you've been the first to step up with such an affirmative statement. It's been obvious to all of us impartial observers
that Harper's been disappointing nobody this year, while the competition has not stepped up. How could the Nats NOT take a prospect with such upside? Yeah, I know that college players are closer to being able to contribute, but how much talent would you have to give up to get a nearer to prime time player? In 2010, so far the answer would appear to be "too much".