Author Topic: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)  (Read 43928 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7970
  • Leprechaun
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #150: April 06, 2011, 01:34:35 PM »
Greinke didn't want to come to the Nats, so the Nats came to him  :lol::


ha.

Who could possibly think it'd be a good idea to acquire guys that the Nats have deemed not good enough to play in DC?

Wil Nieves might be a better hitter now than Pudge, though.  :(

Offline soxfan59

  • Posts: 1208
  • Gough, Gough White Sox!!!
    • John R. Russell, Ltd.
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #151: April 06, 2011, 03:10:23 PM »
Lastings Milledge--  still screwing up fly balls and allowing runs to score. 

Offline Galah

  • Posts: 2859
  • 2016 - the year that everything changed, again.
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #152: April 06, 2011, 03:12:32 PM »
Morgan went 3 for 4 with a triple last night

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22875
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #153: April 06, 2011, 03:25:40 PM »
Peralta was cruising until his D committed an error behind him to let Wells on.  Kendrick and Trumbow followed him up with a couple of base hits.  Looks a lot like the 10th for Storen yesterday.

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 19050
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #154: April 06, 2011, 03:28:14 PM »
> Joel Peralta pitching for the Rays
Torii Hunter strikes out
Vernon Wells reaches on error by Felipe Lopez
Alberto Callaspo singles, Wells to third base
Mark Trumbo singles, Wells scores
Jeff Mathis strikes out
Jake McGee pitching for Joel Peralta (21 pitches; 9 balls)

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35131
  • World Champions!!!
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #155: April 06, 2011, 04:36:30 PM »
Hanrahan 4/4 in saves.

Offline NatsDad14

  • Posts: 5241
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #156: April 06, 2011, 04:37:42 PM »
Joel Fireman Hanrahan.

Offline PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 14287
    • Twitter
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #157: April 06, 2011, 10:14:27 PM »
Dunn had an appendectomy.

supposedly out only 5 days.

Dunn's Anatomy:


Offline soxfan59

  • Posts: 1208
  • Gough, Gough White Sox!!!
    • John R. Russell, Ltd.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35131
  • World Champions!!!
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #159: April 07, 2011, 11:14:17 AM »
Milledge DFA'd.

Offline Coladar

  • Posts: 2826
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #160: April 07, 2011, 11:15:25 AM »
Milledge DFA'd.

Lol, really? Wow. His MLB career is dead in the water now, obviously GMs not graced with knowing him now will realize what those who have had the Milledge experience already know: He's poison.

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76956
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #161: April 07, 2011, 11:30:12 AM »
AZ weeps.   :'(

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35131
  • World Champions!!!


Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 19050
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #164: April 07, 2011, 04:37:31 PM »
How did I spend all this time not knowing there was a Fangraphs Not!?

Offline imref

  • Posts: 42971
  • Re-contending in 202...5?
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #165: April 07, 2011, 10:33:08 PM »
Milledge DFA'd.

The Loudoun Hounds probably need an OF.

Offline Obed_Marsh

  • Posts: 7593
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #166: April 08, 2011, 02:10:33 PM »
I agree that Lastings was lazy and boneheaded but I don't recall anything toxic that he did. Am I missing something?

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 93631
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #167: April 08, 2011, 02:11:06 PM »
I agree that Lastings was lazy and boneheaded but I don't recall anything toxic that he did. Am I missing something?
Showing up late, jerk in the clubhouse

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76956
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #168: April 08, 2011, 02:13:24 PM »
I agree that Lastings was lazy and boneheaded but I don't recall anything toxic that he did. Am I missing something?

He didn't fit neatly into the cookie cutter player that people wanted him to be.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35131
  • World Champions!!!
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #169: April 08, 2011, 02:17:37 PM »
I agree that Lastings was lazy and boneheaded but I don't recall anything toxic that he did. Am I missing something?

He skipped a mandatory team meeting the night before the start of the 2009 season.

Offline Obed_Marsh

  • Posts: 7593
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #170: April 08, 2011, 02:18:30 PM »
I guess YMMV for what constitutes a toxic player. I don't think he goes much beyond putz. Granted he lacks the talent to dog it. I wonder if he will latch on someplace.

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7970
  • Leprechaun
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #171: April 08, 2011, 02:23:45 PM »
He didn't fit neatly into the cookie cutter player that people wanted him to be.

Who wanted this?  And what exactly is a cookie cutter player?  A good player?

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35131
  • World Champions!!!
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #172: April 08, 2011, 02:28:09 PM »
Maybe some people care... but I don't care if the player is a complete dick just as long as he produces.

If you suck, and you're an ass, then we've got problems.

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76956
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #173: April 08, 2011, 02:57:44 PM »
Maybe some people care... but I don't care if the player is a complete dick just as long as he produces.

If you suck, and you're an ass, then we've got problems.


+1

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 19050
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2011)
« Reply #174: April 08, 2011, 03:02:22 PM »
Maybe some people care... but I don't care if the player is a complete dick just as long as he produces.

If you suck, and you're an ass, then we've got problems.

Sounds like you just invoked the Greinke Law of Player Assholiness.