The "plan" is a long term plan, but also calls for significant changes as we go into 2008.
Could you tell me where you read that? When your team's payroll is around $37 million, even an increase of $10 is a significant change. What constitutes significant, I would really love to know.
As for the plan, I'm sure it's not written down anywhere, and that it changes from day to day, because no matter what the team does, they can say it was part of the plan. After a few years, what we all think the plan is today will have changed to the point where we'll read at least once, "at the time, it was part of the plan" and when that happens, everyone will know that there is no real plan, but more a hope that things roll the right way if they take a certain road.
2007 was the tear it down phase, so it's understandable that folks would be uncomfortable with what they see on the field now.
Seen it before, many times, so my expectations for 2007 are very minimal.
There are some who still believe the plan is a charade, just a bunch of words to support slashing payroll. However, I would point out that so far the Nats have been spending a lot of money on scouting, both in the US and abroad, as well as on player development, and then have drafted aggressively (not just easily "signable" prospects, but the best available) and have been very successful in signing these prospects. I see all this as evidence that they really do have a plan, and are sincere in moving forward with it.
For one, the plan isn't written down anyplace, and as I said changes from day-to-day. As for the money spent on scouting, all the Nats have done is bring the Nats scouting staff up to par with some of the other teams, something that had to do no matter the payroll, so the two have nothing to do with each other. As for the players they drafted, this year the only real uncertainty, and as such a gamble, was McGreary. All the rest were pretty much considered signable players. the Nats have so far spent no more or less than that have in previous years on drafted prospects. So excuse me and any like me who will question where the saved money is going.[/quote]
To me, drinking the Kasten Kool-aid means you so far accept that they 1) do have a valid plan for building the team long term, 2) are sincere as well as have the ability to execute it, and 3) the plan will work.
Every team has a plan, but they just don't talk about it, nor do they put a label on it. 1) Teams have always had 3-year plans, 5-year plans and some even longer term plans, but they all have plans. 2) 2007 is not the year to evaluate whether or not anyone is sincere or not, or if they have the ability. 3) Four out of 5 plans end up having to be rethought and cause teams to change the way it does things, sometimes the changes are minor, sometimes drastic, but they still change.
2007 is not the time to start selling Kasten Kool-Aid, when 2007 is barely more than someone sticking their toes in the ocean to see how cold the water is. Sometimes the water is very cold and it takes balls to jump in. Me, I'll wait until 2008 to see what, if any, significant changes there will be, and what kind of product they put on the field. What do I expect, nothing, that way if something does happen, I'll be a happier camper.
One side issue is the new stadium development. The Lerners have been putting a lot of their own dough into the new park ($30m at last report, undoubtedly higher now)
Ah, there you go... Now we know what the Lerners did with the $30 million they chopped off payroll. Instead of using it, or part of it, to field a better team in 2007, or to (God forbid) use money out of their pockets to help with the new stadium, they chose to use it all to make the park they'll be renting have more appeal. No wonder they Lerners are rich, they, like most millionaires, use other people's money.
I just did a preview of this message... and all I can say is,
"Jesus, Ken, could you be a little more verbose, you're not taking up enough space."
Poll
