Author Topic: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread  (Read 104306 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online imref

  • Posts: 24920
  • 1B: The New Hot Corner
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2025: November 26, 2012, 03:21:59 PM »
Giants had Zito last year, Cards had Berkman the year before, before the giants the yankees had their whole roster

Zito was 28 when he signed with the Giants for 6 years.   They paid a ton to get him, but he was a proven commodity (who surprisingly fell off a cliff after the deal).

Berkman got a 1 year $8 million deal in 2011 and a 1 year $12 million deal in 2012.  That's not an over-pay, and it's not a long-term deal.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19025
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2026: November 26, 2012, 03:22:06 PM »
And went with the unproven Detwiler over the proven Lannanator?

and an ace with 92 innings pitched in the majors


Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19025
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2028: November 26, 2012, 03:27:11 PM »
Zito was 28 when he signed with the Giants for 6 years.   They paid a ton to get him, but he was a proven commodity (who surprisingly fell off a cliff after the deal).

Berkman got a 1 year $8 million deal in 2011 and a 1 year $12 million deal in 2012.  That's not an over-pay, and it's not a long-term deal.


here's a headline from right after the deal was signed

"Zito deal a Giant albatross"
http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/blog/_/name/law_keith/id/2710815/zito-deal-giant-albatross

I remember most people panning the deal at the time. The point is most teams that win the series have at least one overpaid declining star

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2029: November 26, 2012, 03:28:17 PM »
so was 2012 an accident given we promoted an unproven Bryce Harper?

And went with the unproven Detwiler over the proven Lannanator?

We had to bring up Harper because of injuries.  We didn't have better options.  Anyway, we won because of pitching and it was knowable that the pitching staff would be good before the season started.  We didn't know how good they'd be but it was widely concluded that the Nationals would have a very good rotation last year.

And we knew Lannan was a #5 pitcher.  He never actually filled that roll with us before because our rotations were so terrible he was always higher in the rotation but, in reality, what we did was replace a #5 pitcher.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 42109
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2030: November 26, 2012, 03:43:12 PM »
Grienke is supposedly asking for 6 years at 25 million per year.

LULZ

Offline terpfan417

  • Posts: 301
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2031: November 26, 2012, 04:06:08 PM »
Would anybody be unhappy with this?

CF Pagan or Victorino (S)
RF Werth (R)
LF Harper (L)
3B Zimmerman (R)
1B Morse (R)
SS Desmond (R)
2B Espinosa (S)
C Ramos (R)

Bench: Moore (R), Bernadina (L), Lombardozzi (S), Tracy (L), Suzuki (R)

Strasburg (R)
Gonzalez (L)
Zimmermann (R)
Anibal Sanchez (R)
Detwiler (L)

Then we'd need Burnett back or a similiar lefty reliver and the bullpen will be fine with Storen/Clipp/Garcia on the back end. This is pretty much what I'm hoping for at this point.

Offline lastobjective

  • Posts: 4742
  • Natitude
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2032: November 26, 2012, 04:09:01 PM »
I feel like I'm torturing myself by watching highlights from NLDS games 1 and 4... but they were such freaking awesome games.

Would anybody be unhappy with this?

Not really, seems cool! I'd go for it. I wish I actually remembered other team's players though, I'm very bad at that so I have to rely on wikipedia to learn about them.

Offline KnorrForYourMoney

  • Posts: 15455
  • Nats RP have no nerve
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2033: November 26, 2012, 04:14:29 PM »
Game 4 is probably my favorite game in Nats history.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19025
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2034: November 26, 2012, 04:17:33 PM »
Would anybody be unhappy with this?

CF Pagan or Victorino (S)
RF Werth (R)
LF Harper (L)
3B Zimmerman (R)
1B Morse (R)
SS Desmond (R)
2B Espinosa (S)
C Ramos (R)

Bench: Moore (R), Bernadina (L), Lombardozzi (S), Tracy (L), Suzuki (R)

Strasburg (R)
Gonzalez (L)
Zimmermann (R)
Anibal Sanchez (R)
Detwiler (L)

Then we'd need Burnett back or a similiar lefty reliver and the bullpen will be fine with Storen/Clipp/Garcia on the back end. This is pretty much what I'm hoping for at this point.

depends on the years required for Pagan/Victorino- anything four or more, and I wouldn't like it


Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2036: November 26, 2012, 04:23:28 PM »
LF – Werth
CF – Harper
3B – Zimmerman
1B – LaRoche
RF – Morse
SS – Desmond
2B – Espinosa
C – Ramos

Bench – Bernadina or Brown, Lombardozzi, Suzuki, Moore, Tracy

Strasburg
Greinke
Gonzalez
Zimmermann
Detwiler

…and start planning your World Series parade and get the MLB erasers ready because the 116 wins in a season record is going down.


Offline lastobjective

  • Posts: 4742
  • Natitude
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2037: November 26, 2012, 04:27:57 PM »
PC that lineup is awesome but it'll take quite a bit of dough to sink any deal with Greinke. Top that with resigning LaRoche and that'd probably leave little to zero cash for any relievers.

I can dream though.

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37377
  • LAC 8)
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2038: November 26, 2012, 04:43:35 PM »
here are some selections i like from the WP story:

Quote
And yet, now may be the time for the Nationals to push their payroll and, while balancing both, make the present a priority over the future. The Nationals don’t have to blow up their plan to focus on winning now.

^
wow it's really not that hard to understand this folks.

Quote
The Nationals should try to capitalize while their elite rotation is definitely healthy and Werth is still likely to have one of his better seasons. The more seasons that pass, the less likely both scenarios become.

The Nationals would not have to spend wildly this offseason to maximize their shot to win in 2013, either. Essentially, they could do so by re-signing Adam LaRoche to the kind of three-year deal he should find on the open market and by attracting a top-shelf starter to replace Edwin Jackson.

AMEN.  it's not like we need to sign 9 free agents.  we really only need a few. 

Offline PebbleBall

  • Posts: 3443
  • Now that right there is baseball.
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2039: November 26, 2012, 04:54:38 PM »
At this point I'm ignoring all the noise and taking for granted the Nationals will add payroll and improve the team.  It's the only sane thing to expect.

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 21662
  • Take two of these 30 minutes before first pitch.
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2040: November 26, 2012, 04:59:14 PM »
wow it's really not that hard to understand this folks.

It's also fairly easy to understand and also have a different view on the situation.

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2041: November 26, 2012, 05:08:45 PM »

Offline terpfan417

  • Posts: 301
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2042: November 26, 2012, 05:12:51 PM »
depends on the years required for Pagan/Victorino- anything four or more, and I wouldn't like it

I imagine they wouldnt be too expensive either way so would it really matter? Wouldnt hamstring us.

Offline zimm_da_kid

  • Posts: 6934
  • Show me Otani
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2043: November 26, 2012, 05:27:10 PM »
I would be happy with pagan or victorino on a 2 year deal.  Anything over that and I would want it front loaded so that they could potentially be regulated to bench duty later on in their contracts.

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2044: November 26, 2012, 05:30:51 PM »
Quote
As for the issues presented by a third year for LaRoche, the Nationals can deal with them when that third year arrives.

This was also in the Kilgore column. If they're willing to give him two, I don't know why they're so against that 3rd year.  I can't believe they're willing to squander a chance to win now for such a relatively low commitment.

Offline rbw5t

  • Posts: 637
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2045: November 26, 2012, 05:57:27 PM »
Would anybody be unhappy with this?

CF Pagan or Victorino (S)
RF Werth (R)
LF Harper (L)
3B Zimmerman (R)
1B Morse (R)
SS Desmond (R)
2B Espinosa (S)
C Ramos (R)

Bench: Moore (R), Bernadina (L), Lombardozzi (S), Tracy (L), Suzuki (R)

Strasburg (R)
Gonzalez (L)
Zimmermann (R)
Anibal Sanchez (R)
Detwiler (L)

Then we'd need Burnett back or a similiar lefty reliver and the bullpen will be fine with Storen/Clipp/Garcia on the back end. This is pretty much what I'm hoping for at this point.

I'd be ok with Pagan/Victorino on a 2-yr deal, but it sounds like Sanchez is asking WAAAY more than I would want to pay him.  I would have rather brought back EJax (and in fact he might still be an option that makes sense).

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37377
  • LAC 8)
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2046: November 26, 2012, 06:09:17 PM »
It's also fairly easy to understand and also have a different view on the situation.

no, i get the feeling that some people on here just don't understand it.  has nothing to do with opinion (for some).

Offline cletusvandamme

  • Posts: 162
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2047: November 26, 2012, 06:19:41 PM »
Just don't do what the Caps did and think you have it all figured out. The window will NOT be open forever and the title won't just magically come because it's owed to you. This isn't a mandate to go crazy in free agency, but you can't point to "one strike away" and let hubris dictate the day.

You lost. Get better. More Strasburg and Bryce 2.0 will help. Replacing ALR from within and plugging Garcia into #5 will not. I don't believe that's a net positive. I can't believe Rizzo does either. There is room to improve while remaining able to pay the bills that are coming down the road.

We're not a second tier dreg that needs to watch where it walks. We are the ones who knock.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19025
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2048: November 26, 2012, 06:33:40 PM »
Just don't do what the Caps did and think you have it all figured out. The window will NOT be open forever and the title won't just magically come because it's owed to you. This isn't a mandate to go crazy in free agency, but you can't point to "one strike away" and let hubris dictate the day.

You lost. Get better. More Strasburg and Bryce 2.0 will help. Replacing ALR from within and plugging Garcia into #5 will not. I don't believe that's a net positive. I can't believe Rizzo does either. There is room to improve while remaining able to pay the bills that are coming down the road.

We're not a second tier dreg that needs to watch where it walks. We are the ones who knock.


There has to be a balance- overpaying for a guy like upton or hamilton may close the window early if their salaries mean we have to watch current players walk.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35049
  • Champs!
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #2049: November 26, 2012, 06:52:04 PM »
... No one said sign Hamilton.