Author Topic: Nationals new 1B discussion  (Read 76330 times)

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Evolution33

  • Posts: 5093
    • Blown Save, Win
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1525 on: January 02, 2011, 10:08:57 pm »
I bet LaRoche doesn't sign until March 17th.

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7970
  • Leprechaun
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1526 on: January 02, 2011, 11:49:02 pm »
The BEST way to judge by hindsight.  Hell, the only way to judge a trade is by hindsight because that's the only way you know what becomes of the traded players.

And Thompson "not amounting to much" is being generous, obviously!

He was traded for a lottery ticket.  The lottery ticket wasn't a winner.  Such is life.  If we wanted Nick back, we could have just signed him after he became a FA. 

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37394
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1527 on: January 02, 2011, 11:52:54 pm »
He was traded for a lottery ticket.  The lottery ticket wasn't a winner.  Such is life.  If we wanted Nick back, we could have just signed him after he became a FA. 

we have a lot of lottery tickets though.  and we're hoping they are all winners.  it's a big gamble, imo.

Offline PatsNats28

  • Posts: 8522
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1528 on: January 02, 2011, 11:54:22 pm »
I think we sign LaRoche in about two weeks to a 2 yr, 15 mil deal (the marquee offering for the Nats)

Offline welch

  • Posts: 18110
  • The Sweetest Right Handed Swing in 1950s Baseball
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1529 on: January 03, 2011, 02:27:27 am »
I think we sign LaRoche in about two weeks to a 2 yr, 15 mil deal (the marquee offering for the Nats)

Hope so. Hope so. If not, then what's been going on?

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 45878
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1530 on: January 03, 2011, 08:11:22 am »
I'm a skeptic on LaRoche over 2 years.  That said, it is interesting to see how we've kind of become more accepting of mediocrity at first as the off-season went on.

Remember it was Dunn or no one?

Then it was, who are the alternatives?  Pena? Unacceptable.  Konerko? too old, right handed.  V-Mart? not really a first baseman, loses value if he does not catch.  Huff?  up and down, last year might have been the fluke, is he a defensive upggrade.   All were questionable, but at least there were alternatives to Dunn.  And no way should we take a chance on Lee - too old, down year; Overbay - injured, old, no power; LaRoche - nice power last year, but nothing else (his OBP was lower than Pena's! and he does not hit as many homers).

Then when Victor, Huff, Dunn, Pena, and Konerko came off the board, it was "hmm, maybe Lee has the bounce back year?"  and "what about Hawpe, he played first until he got to Colorado" and "IF the hang up with LaRoche is 3 years, then give him three years."

I would have been happy with a quick move, Eric "RJ" Hinske (fat old guy who gets lucky a lot) to platoon with Morse.  But now, with the Willingham hole, we likely need 2 position players, not one.  I'm not confident in LaRoche v. LHP, and I'm certainly not confident in finding two acceptable guys v. LHP among Morgan, Bernie, and Ankiel.  Morse can only be one spots partner in a
<--------
so we probably need a Cantu (to partner with LaRoche if we get him) or a RH OF.

In hindsight, this off season may have been severely damaged when we did not come up with something more valuable than Vin Mazzaro when David DeJesus was traded, especially if the Riz was committed to moving Willingham. 

Salvageable, but likely too slow.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21928
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1531 on: January 03, 2011, 08:24:25 am »
We really don't know what Rizzo tried or how many guys just said no to playing for the Nats. My problem with this offseason is that we're getting rid of guys who aren't Rizzo type players (someone needs to explain how this is different that Bowden's obsession with 'toolsy') without having a replacement lined up. Loosing Dunn and Willingham created two holes, but the hole we've managed to fill was RF. The team needs a lot and I doubt they really expect to compete next year, but we seem to be creating needs as fast as we're filling them.

Offline MarquisDeSade

  • Posts: 15101
  • Captain Sadness
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1532 on: January 03, 2011, 08:36:35 am »
someone needs to explain how this is different that Bowden's obsession with 'toolsy'

He wants players with Hot Boyz body types. 

So far he's overpaid for an aging role player with the Hot Boyz body type, shipped off an oft-injured but MLB level LF with power for two Oakland discarded non-MLB ready lottery tickets, and let our LH slugging 1B walk.  Now we've got to hope Adam LaRoche signs (and probably on a disastrous multi-year contract) or we're going to be fighting for the ASSMAN and his .217/.280/.336/.616 line. 

Offline Evolution33

  • Posts: 5093
    • Blown Save, Win
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1533 on: January 03, 2011, 08:44:53 am »
We really don't know what Rizzo tried or how many guys just said no to playing for the Nats. My problem with this offseason is that we're getting rid of guys who aren't Rizzo type players (someone needs to explain how this is different that Bowden's obsession with 'toolsy') without having a replacement lined up. Loosing Dunn and Willingham created two holes, but the hole we've managed to fill was RF. The team needs a lot and I doubt they really expect to compete next year, but we seem to be creating needs as fast as we're filling them.

I have thought about this a lot and I don't know if I know the answer or not, but I can share my thinking. I think what Rizzo wants mroe than anything are complete ballplayers. Guys that can play defense and on offense can run the bases, hit the other way, and put the ball in play when needed. He wants a team that does the little things well and doesn't beat themselves. Right now looking at the team Zimmerman and Werth are the only two guys guranteed to be above average offensively. But that doesn't mean much. Look at the Giants or Reds and where they got offense from. The Giants got unexpected offense more than the Reds but the Reds still got unexpected offense from Rolen and a couple other guys. Rizzo is sort of laying a foundation with guys that are solid and just sort of hoping the offense can come from somewhere, and at the end of the day it is more likely that a guy has a fluke offensive season than a fluke defensive or foundamental season. I also see the Ankiel signing as not just a solid bench guy, but as back-up in case Nyjer doesn't get his head on straight and start looking like a Rizzo type of ball player again.

A couple examples of teams that do this foundation type of building with a couple stars and hoping for suprise offense from somewhere else would be the Angels, Twins, Spurs, and Patriots. These are just my thoughts on what I think Rizzo is trying to do. Like I said I might be wrong.

Offline RyanTheRiot

  • Posts: 238
  • no one circles the wagons
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1534 on: January 03, 2011, 11:46:46 am »
I'm pretty sure Rizzo is doing a little more than "hoping."  Give him time.

Offline Minty Fresh

  • Posts: 20386
  • BOOM!
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1535 on: January 03, 2011, 12:11:27 pm »
Agreed. This also reminds me of when the Nats got Adam Kennedy about 5 minutes after Orlando Hudson was signed.

BTW the source is Bill Ladson Spaceman Spiff so possibly the offer he's talking about, was actually made in 1986.

I'm just now catching up - but mad props for the C & H reference.   :clap:

Offline PatsNats28

  • Posts: 8522
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1536 on: January 03, 2011, 02:08:17 pm »
I have thought about this a lot and I don't know if I know the answer or not, but I can share my thinking. I think what Rizzo wants mroe than anything are complete ballplayers. Guys that can play defense and on offense can run the bases, hit the other way, and put the ball in play when needed. He wants a team that does the little things well and doesn't beat themselves. Right now looking at the team Zimmerman and Werth are the only two guys guranteed to be above average offensively. But that doesn't mean much. Look at the Giants or Reds and where they got offense from. The Giants got unexpected offense more than the Reds but the Reds still got unexpected offense from Rolen and a couple other guys. Rizzo is sort of laying a foundation with guys that are solid and just sort of hoping the offense can come from somewhere, and at the end of the day it is more likely that a guy has a fluke offensive season than a fluke defensive or foundamental season. I also see the Ankiel signing as not just a solid bench guy, but as back-up in case Nyjer doesn't get his head on straight and start looking like a Rizzo type of ball player again.

A couple examples of teams that do this foundation type of building with a couple stars and hoping for suprise offense from somewhere else would be the Angels, Twins, Spurs, and Patriots. These are just my thoughts on what I think Rizzo is trying to do. Like I said I might be wrong.

Very good post. However, those teams are successful because of the role guys they get that do the job well. The George Hills, Gary Neals, Dan Connellys, etc. We need those guys.

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1537 on: January 03, 2011, 02:23:55 pm »
I have thought about this a lot and I don't know if I know the answer or not, but I can share my thinking. I think what Rizzo wants mroe than anything are complete ballplayers. Guys that can play defense and on offense can run the bases, hit the other way, and put the ball in play when needed. He wants a team that does the little things well and doesn't beat themselves. Right now looking at the team Zimmerman and Werth are the only two guys guranteed to be above average offensively. But that doesn't mean much. Look at the Giants or Reds and where they got offense from. The Giants got unexpected offense more than the Reds but the Reds still got unexpected offense from Rolen and a couple other guys. Rizzo is sort of laying a foundation with guys that are solid and just sort of hoping the offense can come from somewhere, and at the end of the day it is more likely that a guy has a fluke offensive season than a fluke defensive or foundamental season. I also see the Ankiel signing as not just a solid bench guy, but as back-up in case Nyjer doesn't get his head on straight and start looking like a Rizzo type of ball player again.

A couple examples of teams that do this foundation type of building with a couple stars and hoping for suprise offense from somewhere else would be the Angels, Twins, Spurs, and Patriots. These are just my thoughts on what I think Rizzo is trying to do. Like I said I might be wrong.

Again I must ask, how does Nyjer Morgan fit into this?  Everything anyone says about Rizzo's plan or philosophy is constantly refuted by Nyjer Morgan's presence on this roster.

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37394
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1538 on: January 03, 2011, 02:29:04 pm »
i think we get laroche, but how awful would it be if we fail to get him.  

the line-up could look like:
CF Morgan
SS Desmond
3B Zimmerman
RF Werth
1B Morse
2B Espinosa
LF Bernadina/Ankiel
C Pudge/Ramos

... :?

Offline Evolution33

  • Posts: 5093
    • Blown Save, Win
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1539 on: January 03, 2011, 02:38:16 pm »
Again I must ask, how does Nyjer Morgan fit into this?  Everything anyone says about Rizzo's plan or philosophy is constantly refuted by Nyjer Morgan's presence on this roster.

Morgan is one guy that had a terrible year last year. When Rizzo brought him in he looked and acted like a Rizzo guy. In 2009 he was good in the field and on the bases. Last season he just lost his head. Rizzo might think Morgan can rebound and get back to at least his career averages (which aren't good enough for lead-off, but still good for a center fielder) or he brought in Ankiel and traded for Brown for the exact reason that Morgan is going to have a much shorter leash in 2011. And even if Rizzo is ready to admit his mistake on Nyjer and cut him loose that isn't always possible. Someone has to play all 9 positions for the Nats next season and a rebounded Morgan is a lot better than a below average defender with no on base skills in either Bernadina and Ankiel. Also it is important to realize Rizzo's plan want come to fruition this season. This season is finding out what the team has at 2nd, short, center, and catcher and if they can be the roll players to go with Zimmerman, Werth, Harper. I leave left field off only because I think the team believes they will have Werth in left in the near future and 1st is left off because the team doesn't even have a question mark there. Whoever plays first this season is not an answer.   

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 45878
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1540 on: January 03, 2011, 02:53:17 pm »
Interesting development in Texas.  ESPN still has up the Enrique Rojas repor that Adrian Beltre is signing there for 6 years, $90 MM. while there are contrary reports cited by Tim Dierkes saying that the deal isn't close, if this happens, it would leave Texas with needing to find room for Michael Young.  Young either moves to DH, leaving him and Mitch Moreland / Chris Davis as the DH / 1B combo, or perhaps Texas looks to Manny / Vladi etc... as DH and Young to first, making Moreland available. 

I'd offer Texas any catcher not named Norris for Moreland, and use him as our 1B. Ramos for Moreland I think would be fair.  They could use a catcher. Right now they have Yorvit, Matt Treanor, and two busted prospects, Teagarden and Max Ramirez.  I'd much rather have Moreland than LaRoche.  This may even be why we are taking a hard line on LaRoche.

Offline KnorrForYourMoney

  • Posts: 16304
  • pissy DC sports fan
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1541 on: January 03, 2011, 02:54:07 pm »
He wants players with Hot Boyz body types. 

:lmao:

Offline PANatsFan

  • Posts: 37398
  • dogs in uncensored, nudes in gameday
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1542 on: January 03, 2011, 02:54:45 pm »
Interesting development in Texas.  ESPN still has up the Enrique Rojas repor that Adrian Beltre is signing there for 6 years, $90 MM. while there are contrary reports cited by Tim Dierkes saying that the deal isn't close, if this happens, it would leave Texas with needing to find room for Michael Young.  Young either moves to DH, leaving him and Mitch Moreland / Chris Davis as the DH / 1B combo, or perhaps Texas looks to Manny / Vladi etc... as DH and Young to first, making Moreland available. 

I'd offer Texas any catcher not named Norris for Moreland, and use him as our 1B. Ramos for Moreland I think would be fair.  They could use a catcher. Right now they have Yorvit, Matt Treanor, and two busted prospects, Teagarden and Max Ramirez.  I'd much rather have Moreland than LaRoche.  This may even be why we are taking a hard line on LaRoche.

I'm not thrilled with the offensive potential of Moreland - what are his <====== splits?

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35152
  • World Champions!!!
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1543 on: January 03, 2011, 02:55:19 pm »
Interesting development in Texas.  ESPN still has up the Enrique Rojas repor that Adrian Beltre is signing there for 6 years, $90 MM. while there are contrary reports cited by Tim Dierkes saying that the deal isn't close, if this happens, it would leave Texas with needing to find room for Michael Young.  Young either moves to DH, leaving him and Mitch Moreland / Chris Davis as the DH / 1B combo, or perhaps Texas looks to Manny / Vladi etc... as DH and Young to first, making Moreland available.  

I'd offer Texas any catcher not named Norris for Moreland, and use him as our 1B. Ramos for Moreland I think would be fair.  They could use a catcher. Right now they have Yorvit, Matt Treanor, and two busted prospects, Teagarden and Max Ramirez.  I'd much rather have Moreland than LaRoche.  This may even be why we are taking a hard line on LaRoche.

I'm like 10,000% sure Rizzo wants to move Norris at all cost.

Just a crazy hunch.

Moreland could definitely be an Overbay type, with a bit more power for quite a few years.

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1544 on: January 03, 2011, 02:57:08 pm »
Morgan is one guy that had a terrible year last year. When Rizzo brought him in he looked and acted like a Rizzo guy. In 2009 he was good in the field and on the bases. Last season he just lost his head. Rizzo might think Morgan can rebound and get back to at least his career averages (which aren't good enough for lead-off, but still good for a center fielder) or he brought in Ankiel and traded for Brown for the exact reason that Morgan is going to have a much shorter leash in 2011. And even if Rizzo is ready to admit his mistake on Nyjer and cut him loose that isn't always possible. Someone has to play all 9 positions for the Nats next season and a rebounded Morgan is a lot better than a below average defender with no on base skills in either Bernadina and Ankiel. Also it is important to realize Rizzo's plan want come to fruition this season. This season is finding out what the team has at 2nd, short, center, and catcher and if they can be the roll players to go with Zimmerman, Werth, Harper. I leave left field off only because I think the team believes they will have Werth in left in the near future and 1st is left off because the team doesn't even have a question mark there. Whoever plays first this season is not an answer.  

Again, this refutes your description of his philosophy unless hope, prayer and finger crossing are part of it.  Morgan, Ankiel and Bernadina are all bad options to one degree or another and this is what's he's decided to go with into the season.  If he can make an exception for the CF position, why wouldn't he make exceptions for other players at other positions that he's traded/let walk, players who are far, far superior overall than those three but players who aren't quite his type?

Offline blue911

  • Posts: 18599
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1545 on: January 03, 2011, 03:00:16 pm »
Interesting development in Texas.  ESPN still has up the Enrique Rojas repor that Adrian Beltre is signing there for 6 years, $90 MM. while there are contrary reports cited by Tim Dierkes saying that the deal isn't close, if this happens, it would leave Texas with needing to find room for Michael Young.  Young either moves to DH, leaving him and Mitch Moreland / Chris Davis as the DH / 1B combo, or perhaps Texas looks to Manny / Vladi etc... as DH and Young to first, making Moreland available. 

I'd offer Texas any catcher not named Norris for Moreland, and use him as our 1B. Ramos for Moreland I think would be fair.  They could use a catcher. Right now they have Yorvit, Matt Treanor, and two busted prospects, Teagarden and Max Ramirez.  I'd much rather have Moreland than LaRoche.  This may even be why we are taking a hard line on LaRoche.

Prince Fielder facing free agency with very few suitors

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35152
  • World Champions!!!
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1546 on: January 03, 2011, 03:00:47 pm »
Wouldn't Fielder be at the top of the list of "not a Rizzo guy"?

Offline PANatsFan

  • Posts: 37398
  • dogs in uncensored, nudes in gameday
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1547 on: January 03, 2011, 03:01:01 pm »
Prince Fielder facing free agency with very few suitors

I have believed that they have wanted Fielder from the first, and the Brewers thwarted them time and again. Hence the fascination with Lee.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21928
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1548 on: January 03, 2011, 03:01:13 pm »
I'm like 10,000% sure Rizzo wants to move Norris at all cost.


yep, and I don't blame him. If he doesn't stick at C he looses most of his value

Offline PANatsFan

  • Posts: 37398
  • dogs in uncensored, nudes in gameday
Re: Nationals new 1B discussion
« Reply #1549 on: January 03, 2011, 03:01:19 pm »
Wouldn't Fielder be at the top of the list of "not a Rizzo guy"?

He might be a Lerner guy though.