Author Topic: Fielder  (Read 289878 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 14327
    • Twitter
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #600 on: January 02, 2012, 01:12:58 pm »
I hope this isn't Boras using the Nats as leverage, but I wouldn't put it past him.

Unless of course Boras is driving the price up for the Marlins, that would be awesome if it cost them an extra mil a year so that they overpay for their precious WS rings.

Offline PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 14327
    • Twitter
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #601 on: January 02, 2012, 01:14:48 pm »
I don't know why everyone laughs so much at that incident.

I think he was right at the time, but the Yanks simply just came out of nowhere and played the trump card.

That was the year when Mark Lerner claimed that the Nats were the second most active team in the offseason, they didn't actually sign anyone of note, but they deserved full credit for all the high dollar bids.  Yeah, nothing funny about that.

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 93631
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #602 on: January 02, 2012, 01:21:42 pm »
This is bullcrap. Rizzo is NOT going after Prince Fielder. Won't happen.

Offline PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 14327
    • Twitter
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #603 on: January 02, 2012, 01:23:11 pm »
This is bullcrap. Rizzo is NOT going after Prince Fielder. Won't happen.

That much is for certain, Rizzo is out of the picture on this deal.

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 93631
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #604 on: January 02, 2012, 01:25:03 pm »
Who the hell is Haudricourt? Works for Milwaukee paper? Why a picture of Teddy in his profile pic?

Offline PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 14327
    • Twitter
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #605 on: January 02, 2012, 01:26:28 pm »
Who the hell is Haudricourt? Works for Milwaukee paper? Why a picture of Teddy in his profile pic?

Scroll down half a page, dude is from Maine...

Offline KnorrForYourMoney

  • Posts: 16304
  • pissy DC sports fan
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #606 on: January 02, 2012, 01:28:53 pm »
That was the year when Mark Lerner claimed that the Nats were the second most active team in the offseason, they didn't actually sign anyone of note, but they deserved full credit for all the high dollar bids.  Yeah, nothing funny about that.


Whatever that has to do with some journalist in Maine...

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7970
  • Leprechaun
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #607 on: January 02, 2012, 01:43:11 pm »
If Fielder is signed we would totally be ahead of the braves. I don't see the point in trading Morse. Imagine the heart of a lineup. Werth, Zimm, Fielder, Morse, Harper. Chased by Ramos and Espi. Once we got that I wouldn't want to break that up.

There would be nowhere to play Morse unless you want play Werth or Harper at CF over the long term. 

Offline mimontero88

  • Posts: 6240
  • The GOAT
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #608 on: January 02, 2012, 01:43:12 pm »
Considering that no one around baseball really seems to be willing to go 8-10 years on Fielder it is entirely possible that the market on Fielder has dropped to the point where the Nats really have no choice but to get involved.  They have the money to get it done and given the right amount of value it may be that we're at a point where it makes no sense not to go after Fielder.  If they can sign him to a relatively (for a blockbuster deal) team-friendly contract and not go over 7 years they almost have to go all in on him.  They already traded the farm for Gio so a move to improve what was a horribly inconsistent offense last year would be the next logical step in trying to compete this year.

Re: Fielder.
« Reply #609 on: January 02, 2012, 01:56:15 pm »
I feel the Nats should get both Fielder and Coco Crisp.  Harper needs a full year at AAA Syracuse. 

Offline imref

  • Posts: 47653
  • NG Nattitude?
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #610 on: January 02, 2012, 01:59:01 pm »
Considering that no one around baseball really seems to be willing to go 8-10 years on Fielder it is entirely possible that the market on Fielder has dropped to the point where the Nats really have no choice but to get involved.  They have the money to get it done and given the right amount of value it may be that we're at a point where it makes no sense not to go after Fielder.  If they can sign him to a relatively (for a blockbuster deal) team-friendly contract and not go over 7 years they almost have to go all in on him.  They already traded the farm for Gio so a move to improve what was a horribly inconsistent offense last year would be the next logical step in trying to compete this year.

the speculation continues to be that Boras is waiting to see what happens with the Rangers and Darvish.  If they can't sign Darvish, they'll go for Fielder to keep up with the Angels.  If they sign Darvish, then they are out on Fielder.

On MLB radio today they talked about Toronto being a likely landing spot, but they too could be waiting to see what the Rangers do first.  Toronto would make a great deal of sense, given their need for a 1B, they have money, and they need to compete with NY and BOS.

Offline imref

  • Posts: 47653
  • NG Nattitude?
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #611 on: January 02, 2012, 02:00:26 pm »
There would be nowhere to play Morse unless you want play Werth or Harper at CF over the long term. 

the emergence of Morse has really screwed up this team's ability to shift players around. :)  Rizzo has to be kicking himself for not going into the start of last season with Morse at 1B.

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7970
  • Leprechaun
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #612 on: January 02, 2012, 02:17:43 pm »
I feel the Nats should get both Fielder and Coco Crisp.  Harper needs a full year at AAA Syracuse. 


I like this idea.  Then after the season, sign Upton/Bourn, bring up Harper, and trade Morse for help wherever we need help (middle infield?) or for some prospects to replenish the system.

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7970
  • Leprechaun
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #613 on: January 02, 2012, 02:22:30 pm »
the speculation continues to be that Boras is waiting to see what happens with the Rangers and Darvish.  If they can't sign Darvish, they'll go for Fielder to keep up with the Angels.  If they sign Darvish, then they are out on Fielder.

On MLB radio today they talked about Toronto being a likely landing spot, but they too could be waiting to see what the Rangers do first.  Toronto would make a great deal of sense, given their need for a 1B, they have money, and they need to compete with NY and BOS.

But if Boras waits until late January and the Rangers end up signing Darvish, that's one less player in the Fielder sweepstakes and even less leverage for Boras and company.

I don't really see what benefit Toronto would get from dropping $150 mil on Prince.  Just adding Fielder would't make enough of an impact.  If they had won the Darvish bidding or gotten some other front line pitcher, then maybe that would have been enough to push them up towards the top of that division.  They'd do nearly as well with just Fielder as they would do with just Carlos Pena - still 7-10 games out.  And they'd save themselves $100 million.

Offline mimontero88

  • Posts: 6240
  • The GOAT
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #614 on: January 02, 2012, 02:30:55 pm »
With Fielder in the Nats lineup just how much could the Nats improve next year?  I know that this is a totally inexact science but let's just look at fangraphs predictions for players in our projected lineup.

1.  SS Ian Desmond (2011 WAR: 1.4, 2012 Projected WAR: 1.9) +.5 wins
2.  RF Jayson Werth (2011 WAR: 2.5, 2012 Projected WAR: 4.5) +2 wins
3.  3B Ryan Zimmerman (2011 WAR (includes Hairston's estimated WAR): 3.2, 2012 Projected WAR: 5.8 ) +2.6 wins
4.  1B Prince Fielder (2011 WAR (for Nats left field, Nix and Gomes): 1.1 WAR, 2012 Projected WAR: 5.6) +4.5 wins
5.  LF Michael Morse (2011 WAR: 3.4, 2012 Projected WAR: 2.4) -1 wins
6.  2B Danny Espinosa (2011 WAR: 3.5, 2012 Projected WAR: 3.8 ) +.3 wins
7.  C Wilson Ramos (2011 WAR: 3.1, 2012 Projected WAR: 3.3) +.2 wins
8.  CF Roger Bernadina (2011 WAR (Ankiel + Bernie): 2.2, 2012 Projected WAR (career average): .7 WAR) - 1.5 wins

That means that assuming we do absolutely nothing at centerfield (no Bryce Harper in the majors, no moving Werth and signing a corner outfielder, NOTHING!!!) a lineup with Prince Fielder would net us 7.6 more wins.  That might be enough to land a playoff spot with a fifth Wild Card.  But we haven't even factored in pitching yet.

We will assume that Strasburg replaces Livo and that Gonzalez replaces the pair of Gorzelanny and Detwiler.  Now what are we looking at?

Stephen Strasburg (2011 WAR (Livo): 1.9, 2012 Projected WAR: 5.3) +3.4 wins
Jordan Zimmermann (2011 WAR: 3.4, 2012 Projected WAR: 3.9) +.5 wins
Gio Gonzalez (2011 WAR (Gorz and Det): 1.1 WAR, 3.0 WAR) +1.9 wins
Chien-Ming Wang (2011 WAR (includes Marquis): 1.6, 2012 Projected WAR (mine): 1.5) -.1 wins
John Lannan (2011 WAR: 1.3, 2012 Projected WAR (career average): 1.3) +0 wins

Wow!!! Now we are up to 13.3 wins added from last year.  And that's still without addressing center field and playing Bernie there all year.  Now because we are in the realm of sabermetrics to properly assess these added wins we will need to compare them to the Nats' Pythagorean  W/L record not their actual results.  Because the Nats missed a game last year and finished close to .500 we are going to assume that we can safely change 78-83 to 78.5-83.5.  That means that just the projected improvements in our lineup with the addition of Prince Fielder would give us a Pythagorean projection of roughly 91.8 wins.

Again, this is not an exact science.  The point is that Fielder instantly makes the Nats a contender so it's time to go get him.  Oh and let's do something about centerfield too ;)

Offline cmdterps44

  • Posts: 15551
  • Future
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #615 on: January 02, 2012, 02:55:38 pm »
Cool Fielder news. Nothing more than speculation that we all already knew.

Offline mimontero88

  • Posts: 6240
  • The GOAT
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #616 on: January 02, 2012, 02:58:07 pm »
Cool Fielder news. Nothing more than speculation that we all already knew.

The word "favorite" being attached to the Nats is a significant change with everything we've been hearing thus far which have been tentative rumors at best.

Offline cmdterps44

  • Posts: 15551
  • Future
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #617 on: January 02, 2012, 03:04:12 pm »
The word "favorite" being attached to the Nats is a significant change with everything we've been hearing thus far which have been tentative rumors at best.

Well it's only a word to place on all the news. I mean we knew that Fielder was in DC a week ago, based on speculation. We saw Buster said that many MLB execs see us talking/signing Fielder. We also saw that one of our players said we're in the mix. Put those news sources all together and compare them to other teams and it looks like we are "the favorite" since we're the only team with rumors like this. I just hope it isn't used to bait other teams.

Offline Baseball is Life

  • Posts: 20393
  • Proud member of the Sunshine Squad.
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #618 on: January 02, 2012, 03:12:38 pm »
Still don't want to sign him for more than six years. And if he's signed, then Morse better find a real estate agent because Harper will have his job real soon. And, no, they are not playing Harper or Werth in CF long term. An OF of Morse, Werth, Harper would be a defensive liability.

Offline Squab

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 4528
  • me lookin at the bullpen
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #619 on: January 02, 2012, 03:36:06 pm »
Still don't want to sign him for more than six years. And if he's signed, then Morse better find a real estate agent because Harper will have his job real soon. And, no, they are not playing Harper or Werth in CF long term. An OF of Morse, Werth, Harper would be a defensive liability.

I guess it's a trade off. I'll take a little worse outfield defense if it means having those guys all in the lineup.

Offline cmdterps44

  • Posts: 15551
  • Future
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #620 on: January 02, 2012, 03:48:03 pm »
So, Kilgore quotes Boras saying more than one team is focused on Fielder. Kilgore also says that the Lerner's stance against a big money splash has thawed. Hopefully that's a good sign... Probably not though.

Offline MarquisDeSade

  • Posts: 15101
  • Captain Sadness
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #621 on: January 02, 2012, 03:57:34 pm »
More unsubstantiated rumours.  Yawn.

Offline Baseball is Life

  • Posts: 20393
  • Proud member of the Sunshine Squad.
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #622 on: January 02, 2012, 04:03:13 pm »
More unsubstantiated rumours.  Yawn.

Yeah, really. It's hard to get excited or not at all this stuff
I guess it's a trade off. I'll take a little worse outfield defense if it means having those guys all in the lineup.


Rizzo has always said that he wants a team that can pitch and play defense and having a below average OF defense does not mesh with that line of thinking.

Offline The Chief

  • Posts: 31839
    • http://www.wnff.net
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #623 on: January 02, 2012, 04:07:01 pm »
I can't believe Knorr is defending the Maine guy

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21928
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #624 on: January 02, 2012, 04:07:10 pm »
Rizzo has always said that he wants a team that can pitch and play defense and having a below average OF defense does not mesh with that line of thinking.

Isn't the plan right now to trot Morse out there?