Author Topic: 11 games under .500  (Read 2924 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline The Chief

  • Posts: 31838
    • http://www.wnff.net
11 games under .500
« on: June 18, 2010, 10:06:23 pm »
Low point of the season to date

:couch:

Offline cmdterps44

  • Posts: 15551
  • Future
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #1 on: June 18, 2010, 10:07:07 pm »
Still better than last year but now I'm feeling what others have been feeling the past few days now. If we can't get a W when our best pitcher is on the mound then I don't know when we'll get a win.

Offline The Chief

  • Posts: 31838
    • http://www.wnff.net
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #2 on: June 18, 2010, 10:09:58 pm »
Remember that feeling during the first 6 weeks when you didn't worry about playing from behind because you always felt like the team would come back and win it?  That's been gone for a while now.  Lately even the pre-game feeling of cautious optimism is gone.  It feels like the last two years, we just happen to have a better record and a young phenom pitching every 5th day.

I just hope this is just an AL Central thing.

Offline PANatsFan

  • Posts: 37398
  • dogs in uncensored, nudes in gameday
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #3 on: June 18, 2010, 10:13:35 pm »
Shouldn't this be merged with the Shake Things Up thread :nono:

Offline The Chief

  • Posts: 31838
    • http://www.wnff.net
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #4 on: June 18, 2010, 10:14:54 pm »
A lot of stuff should be merged.  I'm only one man.

Offline PANatsFan

  • Posts: 37398
  • dogs in uncensored, nudes in gameday
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #5 on: June 18, 2010, 10:15:43 pm »
A lot of stuff should be merged.  I'm only one man.

Just breaking your balls because you started it yourself.

Offline The Chief

  • Posts: 31838
    • http://www.wnff.net
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #6 on: June 18, 2010, 10:18:23 pm »
Yeah I know.  I'm just down on the team right now.

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 19056
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #7 on: June 18, 2010, 10:21:18 pm »
Why do we bring in Willie Harris in important situations?

Offline NatsDad14

  • Posts: 5241
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #8 on: June 18, 2010, 10:21:22 pm »
Yeah I know.  I'm just down on the team right now.
:shock:

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #9 on: June 18, 2010, 10:22:27 pm »
Why do we bring in Willie Harris in important situations?

Why do we have Morgan and Guzman batting 1-2?

Offline EdStroud

  • Posts: 10139
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #10 on: June 18, 2010, 10:42:52 pm »
Peavy lifetime 2-4 with a 4.18 ERA vs the Nationals.

Tomorrow....tomorrow...Sox lose tomorrow....it's only 16 hours away!!!

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35152
  • World Champions!!!
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #11 on: June 18, 2010, 11:16:44 pm »
This team just looks different with Strasburg. It's like its one man, not 25 guys playing together.

I can't put my finger on what it is. I don't blame him at all... it just seems like its not a team anymore... it's a side show.

Also, it'd help if anyone would help Dunn out on offense.

Offline Coladar

  • Posts: 2826
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #12 on: June 19, 2010, 01:47:54 am »
I'm too lazy to look it up right now, but we have to be on pace now to have the worst interleague record we've had as the Nats. I seem to remember, maybe incorrectly, the past two years interleague was one of our only bright spots. Such a disappointment, finally get teams we expected to beat at the start of the season, and this happens.

Offline Ali the Baseball Cat

  • Posts: 17944
  • babble on
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #13 on: June 19, 2010, 02:02:21 am »
Yes, but at least we still have the Orioles coming up.

Offline Coladar

  • Posts: 2826
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #14 on: June 19, 2010, 02:18:19 am »
Yes, but at least we still have the Orioles coming up.

That's what I said when we were going up against Manny Acta's Cleveland Indians, too. :)

Offline Coladar

  • Posts: 2826
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #15 on: June 19, 2010, 05:53:14 am »
It is Guzman that is a cancer to this team.  I don't care about his average.  T Plush takes a minimum of about 5 pitches an at bat.  I would much rather have a .260 hitter that takes 6 pitches than a .290 hitter that takes 2.

That's what I've thought. I like Guz, and think he should be on the bench or batting 7th in RF as long as Morse plays too. But batting second is bull****. everyone, even Guzman, knows he has very short at bats. Two or three pitches if he's lucky. Now you have Morgan leadoff, who if he ever gets on base, is a threat to steal. It is literally criminal to give Morgan two pitches to try to steal on. You want, no, you are required to have someone who takes and fouls off repeatedly, behind a base stealer like Morgan. Now I won't say that's why Morgan has bee caught so often, but, well, i will. He knows he gets next to no chance to steal when Guzman is up and thus runs when he normally would hold because he knows he won't get another chance.

Having Morgan bat leadoff, with his base stealing, followed by a batter like Guzman, is some of the worst managerial mistakes I've ever seen in my life. There is no logic to it, it goes against the most basic tenets of baseball lineups, and it clearly is having a disateous effect on both players at this point. Not only, problems from there seem like they could have gotten in their heads due to a total lack of success from their 1-2 and partially explain why Morgan has fallen so far.

Bottom line, Morgan 1 and Guzman 2 should be #1 when time comes to fire Riggleman, months or years away. It makes no sense, dramatically and visibly hurts the team badly, and worst of all goes against the way you order your batters in the most dismal way possible.

Offline cmdterps44

  • Posts: 15551
  • Future
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #16 on: June 19, 2010, 06:16:51 am »
A lot of stuff should be merged.  I'm only one man.

Yeah, why is that? Where'd the others go?

Offline rileyn

  • Posts: 4244
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #17 on: June 19, 2010, 10:01:10 am »
That's what I've thought. I like Guz, and think he should be on the bench or batting 7th in RF as long as Morse plays too. But batting second is bull****. everyone, even Guzman, knows he has very short at bats. Two or three pitches if he's lucky. Now you have Morgan leadoff, who if he ever gets on base, is a threat to steal. It is literally criminal to give Morgan two pitches to try to steal on. You want, no, you are required to have someone who takes and fouls off repeatedly, behind a base stealer like Morgan. Now I won't say that's why Morgan has bee caught so often, but, well, i will. He knows he gets next to no chance to steal when Guzman is up and thus runs when he normally would hold because he knows he won't get another chance.

Having Morgan bat leadoff, with his base stealing, followed by a batter like Guzman, is some of the worst managerial mistakes I've ever seen in my life. There is no logic to it, it goes against the most basic tenets of baseball lineups, and it clearly is having a disateous effect on both players at this point. Not only, problems from there seem like they could have gotten in their heads due to a total lack of success from their 1-2 and partially explain why Morgan has fallen so far.

Bottom line, Morgan 1 and Guzman 2 should be #1 when time comes to fire Riggleman, months or years away. It makes no sense, dramatically and visibly hurts the team badly, and worst of all goes against the way you order your batters in the most dismal way possible.

Is Morgan really that much of a base stealing threat?  C'mon, this team just lacks talent across the board.  We have a phenom starting pitcher, a good 3B (who we have lost 100 games with over the last 2 years), a promising young shortstop, and a potential stud closer on our 25 man roster.  After that, who do we have that anybody else would want?  Maybe some teams might want Pudge or Willingham for a stretch run this year, but really we are not very good.  Don't blame Riggleman.  Blame Rizzo and his team of assembled star scouts for putting this team on this the field.  Our starting pitching after Strasburg is an absolute disaster and the only thing I'm looking forward to with any optimism is the return of JZ to help boltser it next year.  

Offline PANatsFan

  • Posts: 37398
  • dogs in uncensored, nudes in gameday
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #18 on: June 19, 2010, 10:07:05 am »
Is Morgan really that much of a base stealing threat?  C'mon, this team just lacks talent across the board.  We have a phenom starting pitcher, a good 3B (who we have lost 100 games with over the last 2 years), a promising young shortstop, and a potential stud closer on our 25 man roster.  After that, who do we have that anybody else would want?  Maybe some teams might want Pudge or Willingham for a stretch run this year, but really we are not very good.  Don't blame Riggleman.  Blame Rizzo and his team of assembled star scouts for putting this team on this the field.  Our starting pitching after Strasburg is an absolute disaster and the only thing I'm looking forward to with any optimism is the return of JZ to help boltser it next year. 

This is a terrible post. Willingham and Dunn would start on most teams and are sought after. Roger has raw talent. Pudge would be a pretty valuable trade piece if the Nats paid his salary.

But why would they trade position players.

Offline rileyn

  • Posts: 4244
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #19 on: June 19, 2010, 10:19:45 am »
This is a terrible post. Willingham and Dunn would start on most teams and are sought after. Roger has raw talent. Pudge would be a pretty valuable trade piece if the Nats paid his salary.

But why would they trade position players.
I was talking more in terms of building a team, which is what I'm told every day that we are doing.  Pudge is 38. How many teams build around a 38 year old?  For that matter, how many teams rely on a 30 year old CF that is still learning to play the game?  I would play Roger every day in CF.  There sure wasn't a huge market for Dunn when we signed him a year ago and I'm still unaware of teams banging down our door for his services.  I love Willingham and I would not want him traded, but I think he is more valuable as trade bait right now than he is as a part of our future.  I'm sick and tired of hearing about being patient and waiting until next year (and the year after that, and so on...), but when you really look at what we put on the field every night, that seems to be our fate.

Offline PANatsFan

  • Posts: 37398
  • dogs in uncensored, nudes in gameday
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #20 on: June 19, 2010, 10:29:38 am »
I was talking more in terms of building a team, which is what I'm told every day that we are doing.  Pudge is 38. How many teams build around a 38 year old?  For that matter, how many teams rely on a 30 year old CF that is still learning to play the game?  I would play Roger every day in CF.  There sure wasn't a huge market for Dunn when we signed him a year ago and I'm still unaware of teams banging down our door for his services.  I love Willingham and I would not want him traded, but I think he is more valuable as trade bait right now than he is as a part of our future.  I'm sick and tired of hearing about being patient and waiting until next year (and the year after that, and so on...), but when you really look at what we put on the field every night, that seems to be our fate.

Worst to first is so rare it's unbelievable. Pudge makes the team respectable. If Wil Nieves ever catches Strasburg I will throw up. Dunn is having a monster year, and keep in mind that he started ice cold. He's playing out of his mind. Other GM's didn't need a 1B or are too old fashioned, but he's one amazing hitter. Guys like Willingham that hit like crazy and are loved by their teammates are very valuable.


Nyjer is just plain expendable. He brings nothing that Roger can't, and he has no hitting ability. The fake bunt is the dumbest thing I have ever seen. Lannan is not anywhere near the top of the pitching that this team has in its inventory, but he's convenient for now. Willie Harris is dead weight. He forgot how to hit. Riggleman still thinks veterans deserve playing time, or a guy like Morse would be playing every day - what a waste to sit him pretty much for weeks. The bullpen is ridiculous, and as far as I can tell there's no impending free agents except for Batista. Burnett was a key piece last year, but this year he's at the back end. The starters are awful and the management is questionable, but the rest is falling into place.

Offline The Chief

  • Posts: 31838
    • http://www.wnff.net
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #21 on: June 19, 2010, 10:55:37 am »
I know it's a tough pill to swallow after last night's loss, but the offense is not what is holding this team back, nor is the pen.  The big hole is in the rotation.  A lot of bats are slumping at the same time right now.  It's baseball, it happens.  Our offense is right around league average in almost every category.  Get a real RFer, plug Bernadina in center, pick up an average second catcher, and we're in great shape.  As much as people obsess over 2B, it's really not a huge position of need for us offensively right now.  Let Kennedy or some other defensively-minded warm body fill that spot.

Pitching pitching pitching pitching pitching.

Offline NatsDad14

  • Posts: 5241
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #22 on: June 19, 2010, 10:59:04 am »
Worst to first is so rare it's unbelievable. Pudge makes the team respectable. If Wil Nieves ever catches Strasburg I will throw up.
Quote
6:08 p.m. -- Ivan Rodriguez is catching Strasburg for the third straight time tonight, but that battery won't continue forever. Jim Riggleman said he's planning to have Wil Nieves catch one of Strasburg's next two starts. Considering his next one is a Wednesday late-afternoon game against the Royals, that would seem a logical choice.
:spaz:

Offline UMDNats

  • Posts: 18070
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #23 on: June 19, 2010, 11:18:46 am »
Awesome, so now Nieves can ruin Strasburg just like he ruins our offense. :clap:

Offline Kevrock

  • Posts: 13806
  • That’s gonna be a no from me, dog
Re: 6 games under .500
« Reply #24 on: June 19, 2010, 12:35:46 pm »
F that, I'll be at that game. Sweet, we'll field the all defense squad behind Strasburg and Nieves will contribute +2 Royals runs and -1 Nats run and we'll lose 3-0. In 40 years I'll get to tell my grandchildren I saw Stephen Strasburg's first loss.  :hang: :whip: