Fielder

[PebbleBall]

ding motha f'n ding ... too bad the L's and the LANC are blind and don't see it that way.

To be fair, if what Kilgore said were to pass, and the Lerners changed their approach and there was a drastic rise in payroll to put the finishing touches on building a contender with a key FA or two along with big extensions of homegrown talent... it would sort of validate phase 2 and be the fulfilling of a promise that the Lerners made, which I think would be confirmation of the entire LANC premise.  I don't have a dog in this fight and I'm not trying to flame, but that's how I see it.

So if the Lerners DO see it that way, it would be consistent with what they've always said.  This is the time to make good, and the player to do it with.  Show us something, Lerners.

[PowerBoater69]

To be fair, if what Kilgore said were to pass, and the Lerners changed their approach and there was a drastic rise in payroll to put the finishing touches on building a contender with a key FA or two along with big extensions of homegrown talent... it would sort of validate phase 2 and be the fulfilling of a promise that the Lerners made, which I think would be confirmation of the entire LANC premise.  I don't have a dog in this fight and I'm not trying to flame, but that's how I see it.

So if the Lerners DO see it that way, it would be consistent with what they've always said.  This is the time to make good, and the player to do it with.  Show us something, Lerners.

When the Lerners took over the team they started a pattern of claiming to be two years away from spending money, originally there were mentions of making the Big Splash going into the new ballpark.  So you are right that many will claim that the Fielder signing will signal the successful conclusion of the Plan, but many more of us will counter that it was never necessary to go cheap to begin with and in any case it has gone on four years longer than we were initially led to believe.

[MarquisDeSade]

When the Lerners took over the team they started a pattern of claiming to be two years away from spending money, originally there were mentions of making the Big Splash going into the new ballpark.  So you are right that many will claim that the Fielder signing will signal the successful conclusion of the Plan, but many more of us will counter that it was never necessary to go cheap to begin with and in any case it has gone on four years longer than we were initially led to believe.

Sanity.

[PebbleBall]

When the Lerners took over the team they started a pattern of claiming to be two years away from spending money, originally there were mentions of making the Big Splash going into the new ballpark.  So you are right that many will claim that the Fielder signing will signal the successful conclusion of the Plan, but many more of us will counter that it was never necessary to go cheap to begin with and in any case it has gone on four years longer than we were initially led to believe.

Sure, I never meant to say that everyone would join together and hold hands - obviously no matter what, both sides will remain entrenched so as to not do anything that might be perceived as an admission of being wrong. 

BUT.  If the future of this team is built on the backs of two consecutive #1 picks earned from those awful seasons, and the rest of the rebuilt farm system, and money is spent to keep that homegrown talent in place, along with FA's like Prince, then I think it would all be worth it. 

EDIT: By the way, I don't think this is going to happen.

[Tyler Durden]

So the outcome of LAC vs. LANC hinges on Fielder.  So does the failure or success of 'The Plan.'

This has become epic.  I wish Fielder/Boras would hurry up and decide.  The fate of the world could depend on this one decision.  Doesn't Boras know that he's tearing this board apart with his greed/unreasonable demands and/or advocacy for his client?

[zimm_da_kid]

So the outcome of LAC vs. LANC hinges on Fielder.  So does the failure or success of 'The Plan.'

This has become epic.  I wish Fielder/Boras would hurry up and decide.  The fate of the world could depend on this one decision.  Doesn't Boras know that he's tearing this board apart with his greed/unreasonable demands and/or advocacy for his client?

I don't think he would care

[Obed_Marsh]

So the outcome of LAC vs. LANC hinges on Fielder.  So does the failure or success of 'The Plan.'

Drama queen. Fielder settles nothing.

Win more than you lose. Come close when you don't make the playoffs. We have been waiting for this since 2005. Address the losing and the acrimony will decrease.

[Ray D]

So the outcome of LAC vs. LANC hinges on Fielder. 

If Fielder signs with another team for 10 years, 220M - then no. I trust that nobody in their right mind would want us to match that.   If he signs with another club for 4  years, 80m, then yes, I think we will all concede that the Lerners are cheap.  In between, the debate continues.

[PowerBoater69]

Sure, I never meant to say that everyone would join together and hold hands - obviously no matter what, both sides will remain entrenched so as to not do anything that might be perceived as an admission of being wrong. 

BUT.  If the future of this team is built on the backs of two consecutive #1 picks earned from those awful seasons, and the rest of the rebuilt farm system, and money is spent to keep that homegrown talent in place, along with FA's like Prince, then I think it would all be worth it. 

EDIT: By the way, I don't think this is going to happen.

I'd have to check the rosters of previous World Series winners, but I'm pretty sure that it is possible to build a winner without having multiple #1 overall draft picks.

[Tyler Durden]

My post was a joke. 

Fielder won't settle anything.  Lerners will still be either cheap or not cheap and Rizzo will still be a dope or a good GM, depending on your point of view.  But at least Bowden will always be leather-pantsed and terrible.

Edit - For some people, Lerners will always be cheap or not cheap and for some people, Rizzo will also be a dope or a good GM.

[The Chief]

There's a difference between being cheap and *having* been cheap in the past.  Fielder doesn't re-write history, but it is a chance to show that the times they are a changin'

[Obed_Marsh]

Put me in the Realpolitik camp. Winning solves most ills. I don't give a crap about budget if they win consistantly.

[mach1ne]

If Fielder signs with another team for 10 years, 220M - then no. I trust that nobody in their right mind would want us to match that.   If he signs with another club for 4  years, 80m, then yes, I think we will all concede that the Lerners are cheap.  In between, the debate continues.

Spot on.

[PebbleBall]

I'd have to check the rosters of previous World Series winners, but I'm pretty sure that it is possible to build a winner without having multiple #1 overall draft picks.

All I'm saying is if we're sitting here in 2015 with a top 10 payroll and a perennial contender, a powerhouse franchise, then it's possible that yes, the plan was to strip, rebuild starting with the farm, and spend.  This is all extreme best case scenario fantasizing, but yeah in that moment I think it would all seem worth it.

[PebbleBall]

So the outcome of LAC vs. LANC hinges on Fielder.  So does the failure or success of 'The Plan.'

You've missed my point.  I was talking about the larger picture that Kilgore presented by saying "the Nats have the resources to sign 'em all if they choose to use them."  I was just saying that if they use those resources in that way, I think perceptions change.  Fielder was just one part of that, not that it hinges on him alone.  And none of it was meant as a LANC screed, it was just optimism or something. 

[Kevrock]

Put me in the Realpolitik camp. Winning solves most ills. I don't give a crap about budget if they win consistantly.

 

I do. As a consumer, I want my money to be used in some way toward the product I'm watching.

As a fan, I want to know that this franchise is willing to spend money to push the team over the hump during competition windows.

Anything short of winning a World Series, I will criticize the owners if they are not spending money appropriate to our market and their revenue. If someday we have a winning record, it's possible we could have made the playoffs if they were willing to spend. If we are someday a wildcard team, it's possible we could have won the pennant if they spent. If someday we lose in the World Series, it's possible we could have won the whole thing if they had spent.

[Tyler Durden]

You've missed my point.  I was talking about the larger picture that Kilgore presented by saying "the Nats have the resources to sign 'em all if they choose to use them."  I was just saying that if they use those resources in that way, I think perceptions change.  Fielder was just one part of that, not that it hinges on him alone.  And none of it was meant as a LANC screed, it was just optimism or something. 

I didn't miss your point.  I was just noting how entrenched some people in the various camps seem to be.  Not saying you're in any particular camp.  I think it adds to the board - especially at times like this when there is nothing going on.

Also - loosing.

We just need something to happen with Fielder/Darvish so we can all move on from this will he/won't he thing and the awkward mating dance going on between Lerner/Rizzo and Boras right now and speculating on 'what does this mean for the Nats' big picutre type stuff.  Nobody really knows right now - even if Fielder signs, they could turn around and trade Zim at the trade deadline and we're right back to LAC/LANC/whatever.

[Ray D]

Who's going to break 100?

[JCA-CrystalCity]

I will always be in the LAC camp so long as the owners fund their purchase of the team thorugh debt with both principal and interest being covered solely from team revenues and not a dime out of their pockets.  There are other teams that have owners actually paying some of the debt carrying cost, agree to pay more out of their pockets, and only seek to limit further bleeding to a reasonable extent.  Not that they don't cover some debt service, but they view the team as a long run investment and are satisified with capital appreciation.  There are other teams that essentially operate close to their operating income, with occasional losses as well as profits, unlike the skimming operation the Lerner family has.  The will always be cheap in my mind if they operate that way.

Having said that, Fielder at a mega contract is at most an indication that they may be changing their ways, not that they have.  In terms of a baseball operation, I think there is a very sensible alternative to signing Fielder, which is to pick up a vet leadoff LF (Abreu, Damon) on a short term contract, and preserve longer term roster and payroll flexibility for better free agency markets that more closely match team needs.  We've been around the block on this point, but the CF market has so many options next year that it is unreasonable to think there will not be multiple targets.  While Fielder is a viable option, I could respect someone who concludes otherwise if the terms get ridiculous, if he devalues both morse and laroche in trade, and otherwise limits positional flexibility independent of the cost. 

I'm just not all in on this signing. 

[tomterp]

I'd have to check the rosters of previous World Series winners, but I'm pretty sure that it is possible to build a winner without having multiple #1 overall draft picks.

What's relevant is what is the best way for the Nats to build a winner.

I don't see any possible way we come down with two massively talented budding superstars like Harper and Stras without having the picks we had.  The only other comparable talent we could have gotten our hands on was Josh Hamilton.

[JCA-CrystalCity]

Josh Hamilton, who happens to be unsigned for next year. . .

[MarquisDeSade]

...which is to pick up a vet leadoff LF (Abreu, Damon) on a short term contract...

Wasn't there someone on here last year saying we should get Damon?  Wait, I believe that person was me.  Johnny Damon FTW.

[tomterp]

I didn't miss your point.  I was just noting how entrenched some people in the various camps seem to be.  Not saying you're in any particular camp.  I think it adds to the board - especially at times like this when there is nothing going on.

Also - loosing.

We just need something to happen with Fielder/Darvish so we can all move on from this will he/won't he thing and the awkward mating dance going on between Lerner/Rizzo and Boras right now and speculating on 'what does this mean for the Nats' big picutre type stuff.  Nobody really knows right now - even if Fielder signs, they could turn around and trade Zim at the trade deadline and we're right back to LAC/LANC/whatever.

Damn, Half Smokes has hacked into Tyler's account.   

[tomterp]

I will always be in the LAC camp so long as the owners fund their purchase of the team thorugh debt with both principal and interest being covered solely from team revenues and not a dime out of their pockets.  There are other teams that have owners actually paying some of the debt carrying cost, agree to pay more out of their pockets, and only seek to limit further bleeding to a reasonable extent.  Not that they don't cover some debt service, but they view the team as a long run investment and are satisified with capital appreciation.  There are other teams that essentially operate close to their operating income, with occasional losses as well as profits, unlike the skimming operation the Lerner family has.  The will always be cheap in my mind if they operate that way.

They paid $450m for the franchise, and obviously borrowed quite a bit to do so but we don't have the actual numbers.  Let's say they borrowed $300, they would still have shelled out $150m out of pocket, though would have $300m in debt to repay. 

If this were anything but OUR team here (i.e. just another LBO of a company) everyone would assume that the business itself would have to generate enough cash to make the debt payments as well as give a return on the $150m invested by the owners.   That is obviously the point of any investment.  The major difference between our specific situation and this generic business model is that the stadium was publically funded and the lease payment the team must make to the city is obviously a token, not a real market rate.  So in essence they have a very low cost structure that has been handed to them, and in return they should not be diverting all of that to shareholder returns but sharing the wealth with the greater community at large who provided the benefit.

[Baseball is Life]

He hits for good OBP, don't write him off yet.

Is Marerro another Nick Johnson? Good OBP but no power. And he seems to have the injury thing down