Author Topic: Fire Rizzo  (Read 162377 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline The Chief

  • Posts: 30655
  • it's a thumb
    • http://www.wnff.net
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #75: December 03, 2010, 08:08:34 PM »
That he wanted a fourth year was common knowledge for quite a while, anyone not aware of that wasnt paying attention

Online imref

  • Posts: 26407
  • 1B: The New Hot Corner
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #76: December 03, 2010, 10:18:44 PM »
hey, think about it this way, we'll draft 6, 23, and 34 next year.

The odds are really good we get ourselves someone who by 2014 will be able to play 3rd base.

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #77: December 03, 2010, 10:26:50 PM »
hey, think about it this way, we'll draft 6, 23, and 34 next year.

The odds are really good we get ourselves someone who by 2014 will be able to play 3rd base.

And we're probably going to need him.  :icon_frown:

Offline PebbleBall

  • Posts: 3440
  • Now that right there is baseball.
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #78: December 04, 2010, 11:32:40 AM »
I was just reading through this thread and stopped on page 2 when Yunesky Maya was brought in as evidence in favor of the Lerners' spending.  If that's a serious argument, case-freaking-closed.

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37377
  • LAC 8)
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #79: December 04, 2010, 11:43:06 AM »
lol @ potomac...

maya, really?

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35047
  • Champs!
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #80: December 05, 2010, 05:15:55 PM »
Add another log to the fire.

Replacing Dunn with Werth for more money and significantly more years is beyond stupid.

Anyone that likes this deal is falling for the shell game he is playing. They didn't improve the team, they simply covered one whole with a guy that's going to hurt the team for years to come.

I'm getting in early... but this move is going to kill the Nats in the coming years.

Offline Nathan

  • Posts: 10723
  • Wow. Such warnings. Very baseball. Moderator Doge.
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #81: December 05, 2010, 05:28:12 PM »
[tomterp] A whole what? [/tomterp]

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 33088
  • Hell yes!
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #82: December 05, 2010, 05:31:20 PM »
[tomterp] A whole what? [/tomterp]

Hole, whole, whatever.    :roll:

Offline Nathan

  • Posts: 10723
  • Wow. Such warnings. Very baseball. Moderator Doge.
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #83: December 05, 2010, 05:34:18 PM »
:smh: :razz:

:P

Offline shoeshineboy

  • Posts: 7879
  • Walks Kill!! Walks Kill! Walks Kill!!!!
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #84: December 05, 2010, 05:35:42 PM »
I'm getting in early... but this move is going to kill the Nats in the coming years.

It depends on whether they think this is the deal they point to to show they are willing to spend or simply the beginning of a new era of seriousness about winning. If this is it, I'm with you. This is silly money for a 32-yo OF who has been thriving in the best offensive lineup in the league. It's why I was glad they didn't end up getting Tex for 180M, because he alone wouldn't have made a huge difference if you don't build around it.

Werth seems more like a guy they will need to deal away and eat salary in a couple of years, assuming Harper is ready.

Offline John

  • Posts: 121
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #85: December 05, 2010, 07:26:40 PM »
I think this is premature.
You were the first to call it. Good job. I have always been a Rizzo supporter.

Sounds like he's not finished yet. Werth is an upgrade over Dunn.

I'll repeat - so what if they had to overpay a little.

Offline GMUTrkstar

  • Posts: 925
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #86: December 05, 2010, 07:50:50 PM »
It depends on whether they think this is the deal they point to to show they are willing to spend or simply the beginning of a new era of seriousness about winning. If this is it, I'm with you. This is silly money for a 32-yo OF who has been thriving in the best offensive lineup in the league. It's why I was glad they didn't end up getting Tex for 180M, because he alone wouldn't have made a huge difference if you don't build around it.

Werth seems more like a guy they will need to deal away and eat salary in a couple of years, assuming Harper is ready.

First everyone is mad that they let Dunn go using the argument that we still need a competitive team on the field this year etc... Now people are mad Rizzo went out and got the big name FA he talked about, added power to our line up and also helped make the team competitive for this year and the near term future.

I think Rizzo has some nice complementary moves that go along with this deal. My prediction:

Willingham+Prospects will be traded for ML pitching
Carlos Pena Signs a one year deal with the Nats

Both these moves plus the Werth signing would definitely make us a better team than last year.

Offline GMUNat

  • Posts: 5245
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #87: December 05, 2010, 07:53:36 PM »
A decent move in a vacuum. But you need moves to complement it.

Offline GMUNat

  • Posts: 5245
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #88: December 05, 2010, 08:15:27 PM »
You can't say the fans are too negative when the team has finished in last place 5 out of 6 years, has 298 losses the last 3 years, Finished with a bottom 10 record for the last 5 years.

Online mitlen

  • Posts: 56977
  • We had 'em all the way.
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #89: December 05, 2010, 08:25:19 PM »
Alright, signing Werth, we'll give Riz another week.

Offline Minty Fresh

  • Posts: 19612
  • Oh you call what you got a team?
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #90: December 05, 2010, 09:11:04 PM »
A decent move in a vacuum. But you need moves to complement it.

+1

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #91: December 16, 2010, 06:10:12 PM »

Offline daveb32

  • Posts: 1860
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #92: December 16, 2010, 06:26:31 PM »
Starting to get on board with this thread. We need a first baseman and starting pitching, so instead of trading for that, Rizzo takes one of our prime trading chips and flips him for a reliever and an outfielder? If this is not part of some bigger plan I might pledge allegiance to another team.

Offline The Chief

  • Posts: 30655
  • it's a thumb
    • http://www.wnff.net
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #93: December 16, 2010, 06:36:56 PM »
This thread is an embarrassment on so many different levels.

1) it was created at Rizzo's low point (right after Dunn left)

2) it was mostly created as an in-joke (there have been several "Fire X" threads here, just as there have been on all sports message boards throughout history I'm sure)

3) man you got judgmental in a hurry!

4) why so serious?

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #94: December 16, 2010, 06:51:19 PM »
FYI, firemikerizzo.com is available.

Online spidernat

  • Posts: 69703
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #95: December 16, 2010, 06:52:14 PM »
Two moles weren't enough.


Offline Potomac Cannons

  • Posts: 3279
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #96: December 16, 2010, 07:21:48 PM »
Starting to get on board with this thread. We need a first baseman and starting pitching, so instead of trading for that, Rizzo takes one of our prime trading chips and flips him for a reliever and an outfielder? If this is not part of some bigger plan I might pledge allegiance to another team.

31 year old OF with bad back, bad knee, and never above 2.9 WAR is not a prime trading chip.  The return is a 23 year old reliever who some project to a closer and a CF who just needs solid production in AAA to be ready.  That's a good return.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35047
  • Champs!
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #97: December 16, 2010, 07:23:31 PM »
Rodriguez is out of options.

One slip up, and he's either dead weight, or lost to the waivers process.

Offline PatsNats28

  • Posts: 8462
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #98: December 16, 2010, 07:42:40 PM »
31 year old OF with bad back, bad knee, and never above 2.9 WAR is not a prime trading chip.  The return is a 23 year old reliever who some project to a closer and a CF who just needs solid production in AAA to be ready.  That's a good return.

I could rephrase that as such: We just lost a key hitter in our lineup whose production will most likely be replaced by Nyjer Morgan (Bernadina to left) in return for an erratic reliever and a 25 year old CF who struggled in AAA. Clearly a terrible deal, right?

Offline PANatsFan

  • Posts: 37395
  • dogs in uncensored, nudes in gameday
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #99: December 16, 2010, 07:46:50 PM »
Rodriguez is out of options.

One slip up, and he's either dead weight, or lost to the waivers process.

These are the Rizzo type relievers though. Bally, Rodriguez, the new Rule V guy, Storen.