Author Topic: Fire Rizzo  (Read 213593 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline RD

  • Posts: 1462
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #325: August 16, 2011, 04:05:36 PM »

Trading Josh Willingham for spare parts (looks like he'll be a Type A)


Willingham being Type A is irrelevant. We wouldn't offer him arbitration if he was still here, because he would accept. 1) Hes not in our long term plans, and 2) Nobody would sign and forfeit their first rounder for Josh Willingham. And if he was not offered arbitration, he'd walk away for nothing.

No matter how you want to spin it, trading Willingham was not a bad move.

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7970
  • Leprechaun
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #326: August 16, 2011, 04:13:06 PM »
Willingham being Type A is irrelevant. We wouldn't offer him arbitration if he was still here, because he would accept. 1) Hes not in our long term plans, and 2) Nobody would sign and forfeit their first rounder for Josh Willingham. And if he was not offered arbitration, he'd walk away for nothing.

No matter how you want to spin it, trading Willingham was not a bad move.

This is so true.  Hammer being a Type A is just about irrelevant.  If the quibble is with HRod and Corey Brown, that makes more sense.

I also don't understand what signing Maya has to do with the draft picks. 

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #327: August 16, 2011, 04:19:12 PM »
Holy crap, why would you think they lied about doing an MRI on Purke? Purke could speak up, you know. Do you really sincerely believe they didn't prepare scouting reports on these guys?

I don't trust Mike Rizzo's ability to tell the truth as far as I can throw a 10-ton banana.  And why would Purke speak up? How is that in his best interest?

Offline PANatsFan

  • Posts: 37395
  • dogs in uncensored, nudes in gameday
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #328: August 16, 2011, 04:19:47 PM »
I don't trust Mike Rizzo's ability to tell the truth as far as I can throw a 10-ton banana.  And why would Purke speak up? How is that in his best interest?

PC = paranoid crackpot

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #329: August 16, 2011, 04:20:32 PM »
Willingham being Type A is irrelevant. We wouldn't offer him arbitration if he was still here, because he would accept. 1) Hes not in our long term plans, and 2) Nobody would sign and forfeit their first rounder for Josh Willingham. And if he was not offered arbitration, he'd walk away for nothing.

No matter how you want to spin it, trading Willingham was not a bad move.

If Henry Rodriguez and Corey Brown ARE a part of our long term plans then I fear for our long term plans.

Online Slateman

  • Posts: 53862
  • THE SUMMONER OF THE REVERSE JINX
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #330: August 16, 2011, 04:21:31 PM »
who's our CF for next year?  or are we going to continue to wait another year (and then a year after that). 

i'm hoping we get one of those guys in the offseason.

I don't know man. But the offseason makes a lot more sense. Upton is just not productive. Just look at his numbers and tell me you really want him batting leadoff. Let me put it another way: Do you want this year's version of Danny Espinosa leading off? Upton hasn't hit leadoff all season because he doesn't look at enough pitches to lead off. He doesn't get on base. If you could promise me that 2007 or 2008 BJ Upton is coming back, I'd be down. But the truth is we're getting as much production out of Rick Ankiel as the Rays are getting out of BJ Upton.

Not trading for Denard Span was a great non-move. We didn't need him this year. We need him for future years. Span just got put on the DL again for concussion like symptoms. We can get him in the offseason and it shouldn't cost us a good closer and a high potential middle infielder. Span may not be effective for a long time. If we're going to gamble, let's make it an appropriate gamble. Like we've  done with Wang, Purke and some others.

If we're going to trade our best and brightest young players, let's get something worthy. Like Jacoby Ellsbury :D

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76205
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #331: August 16, 2011, 04:23:16 PM »
PC = paranoid crackpot

Chief, we desperately need an irony smiley.   ;)

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #332: August 16, 2011, 04:23:33 PM »
PC = paranoid crackpot

Or Yunesky Maya has permanently marked Mike Rizzo as a liar...and a liar who won't acknowledge he lied (see Yunesky Maya's continued presence in the organization).

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 19050
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #333: August 16, 2011, 04:23:45 PM »
I don't trust Mike Rizzo's ability to tell the truth as far as I can throw a 10-ton banana.  And why would Purke speak up? How is that in his best interest?

Dude, even Jim Bowden wouldn't lie about that - though in Bowden's case that's because he doesn't know what an arthrogram is. But I still completely fail to see any reason why Rizzo would lie about something which Purke, his family, his agent, and the entire Nationals medical staff could disprove with something as simple as an off-the-record anonymous (to the public) tip to Kilgore.

Crazy talk.

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 19050
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #334: August 16, 2011, 04:25:23 PM »
Chief, we desperately need an irony smiley.   ;)

LANC aren't paranoid. We're naive and stupid and innocent, and we might be overly trusting, but oh wait all those things are the opposite of paranoid.

Offline RD

  • Posts: 1462
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #335: August 16, 2011, 04:26:44 PM »
If Henry Rodriguez and Corey Brown ARE a part of our long term plans then I fear for our long term plans.

Brown, not so much.

I could see Rodriguez having a role on this team going forward. He's been very inconsistent but hes had a lot of fantastic outings(obviously some really poor ones as well). It takes awhile to harness the type of stuff he's got. I think his ability could be better handled as well - He's a short reliever, not a long one. No reason to see him out there for 2+ innings. He's also had some outings where he hasn't pitched well in his first inning(he may come in with 2 outs and only need to get 1 out but he 'll struggle to get that out, but not get a run) but then they trot him back out there and the wheels fall off. He's a guy who you know you shouldn't run him out for another inning if he had trouble finishing the one before.

He's got a lot of work to do, but he needs more consistency. If he''s not a long term part, its not a big deal either. AT the time of the trade, it was solid value. We tried moving Willingham for months. Im fairly certain if there was a much better deal out there, we would've made it. But at least we tried to get something for Willingham, rather than getting nothing for him. So far it hasn't worked out great, but Rodriguez does still have room to grow and be a productive part of the pen.

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76205
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #336: August 16, 2011, 04:29:28 PM »
LANC aren't paranoid. We're naive and stupid and innocent, and we might be overly trusting, but oh wait all those things are the opposite of paranoid.

That was mostly aimed at the Lerners number 1 shill, not so much at his LANC flock. He knows what I'm talking about.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35069
  • World Champions!!!
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #337: August 16, 2011, 04:33:19 PM »
Brown, not so much.

I could see Rodriguez having a role on this team going forward. He's been very inconsistent but hes had a lot of fantastic outings(obviously some really poor ones as well). It takes awhile to harness the type of stuff he's got. I think his ability could be better handled as well - He's a short reliever, not a long one. No reason to see him out there for 2+ innings. He's also had some outings where he hasn't pitched well in his first inning(he may come in with 2 outs and only need to get 1 out but he 'll struggle to get that out, but not get a run) but then they trot him back out there and the wheels fall off. He's a guy who you know you shouldn't run him out for another inning if he had trouble finishing the one before.

He's got a lot of work to do, but he needs more consistency. If he''s not a long term part, its not a big deal either. AT the time of the trade, it was solid value. We tried moving Willingham for months. Im fairly certain if there was a much better deal out there, we would've made it. But at least we tried to get something for Willingham, rather than getting nothing for him. So far it hasn't worked out great, but Rodriguez does still have room to grow and be a productive part of the pen.

You know where it'd be great if he could learn his craft? In the minor leagues.

Oh wait, he can't go there.

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #338: August 16, 2011, 04:33:30 PM »
[Rodriguez's] got a lot of work to do...

...and he'll have to do all of that work on the major league roster, which is precisely the problem, precisely why he should have been untouchable as far as trade targets go.

No good GM would ever trade for someone who is so "unpolished" and without options so he's stuck with him on the 25-man roster.

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 19050
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #339: August 16, 2011, 04:39:04 PM »
That was mostly aimed at the Lerners number 1 shill, not so much at his LANC flock. He knows what I'm talking about.

It's funny, when I try to guess I suddenly feel paranoid myself. :lol:

Offline RD

  • Posts: 1462
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #340: August 16, 2011, 04:41:18 PM »
You know where it'd be great if he could learn his craft? In the minor leagues.

Oh wait, he can't go there.
...and he'll have to do all of that work on the major league roster, which is precisely the problem, precisely why he should have been untouchable as far as trade targets go.

No good GM would ever trade for someone who is so "unpolished" and without options so he's stuck with him on the 25-man roster.

Rodriguez had shown signs of improvement last year in Oakland. He was 33/13 K/BB in 27 innings. There was reason to believe he was figuring it out. And like I said, I think some of his bad outings could've been prevented.

We're not contending for a playoff spot just yet. It's not a big deal to allow him to see if he can develop at the big league level. If he doesn't, he doesn't. Even if he had the control in the minors, there's no guarantee he would've carried that over to the big league level. Even if we end up with nothing from the Willingham trade, it's not a big deal. Willingham wasnt in the long term plans, so its not like we gave up a key piece. We made the best move possible, and the kids didn't work out. Just like the Marquis trade this year - better to try and get something rather than let them go for nothing. I dont blame him for the trade, and I think it was decet value at the time. It just hasn't worked out that well yet. And it might not ever.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35069
  • World Champions!!!
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #341: August 16, 2011, 04:42:29 PM »
Do you change your thoughts if Hammer is offered arbitration and he turns it down?

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 19050
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #342: August 16, 2011, 04:52:05 PM »
Do you change your thoughts if Hammer is offered arbitration and he turns it down?

Hindsight is 20/20. He might turn it down to get the hell out of McAfee.

Offline RD

  • Posts: 1462
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #343: August 16, 2011, 05:08:18 PM »
There's no chance he turns down arbitration.

No team will sign him and forfeit their 1st rounder.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 20298
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #344: August 16, 2011, 05:13:12 PM »
There's no chance he turns down arbitration.

No team will sign him and forfeit their 1st rounder.

teams with protected first rounder or teams who expect to sign multiple type As may consider him

Offline PANatsFan

  • Posts: 37395
  • dogs in uncensored, nudes in gameday
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #345: August 16, 2011, 05:15:14 PM »
They are doing a new CBA, I'm guessing draft pick forfeits are going to be replaced entirely by sandwich picks.

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7970
  • Leprechaun
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #346: August 16, 2011, 06:00:29 PM »
Do you change your thoughts if Hammer is offered arbitration and he turns it down?

If he brings back a supplemental pick plus a 1st round pick or maybe even a 2nd round pick, I'll say Rizzo screwed up the Hammer thing.  Anything less than that then he made the right call.  Even with 2 1st round picks, HRod and Corey Brown have about the same likelihood of contributing an equal amount.

Offline PatsNats28

  • Posts: 8514
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #347: August 16, 2011, 06:34:48 PM »
Hindsight is 20/20. He might turn it down to get the hell out of McAfee.

lol you're two names behind. Was Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum until this year, now o.co coliseum haha

Offline comish4lif

  • Posts: 2884
  • Too Stressed to care.
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #348: August 16, 2011, 06:40:10 PM »
Don't forget Yunesky Maya, his international crown jewel.

Yunesky Maya is the reason I don't fully believe the MRI was done on Purke...or that any of the necessary due diligence was done on any of these draft picks, frankly.
Does your Curly W Nationals cap have a tin foil lining?

Offline wpa2629

  • Posts: 17048
  • No Trade Clause
Re: Fire Rizzo
« Reply #349: August 16, 2011, 06:42:26 PM »
I don't trust Mike Rizzo's ability to tell the truth as far as I can throw a 10-ton banana.  And why would Purke speak up? How is that in his best interest?

Dude, seriously, you sound nuts