Bleacher Report - Articles by Steven Biel

Congratulations Ben Bernanke, the Most Powerful Nationals Fan In the World

Steven Biel — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 20:16:00 -0400

It's been a great week in NatsTown, and now we have the kicker. President Obama has re-appointed Nationals fan and Chairman of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke.

How big a Nationals fan is Bernanke? There's an anecdote in David Wessel's excellent new book In Fed We Trust that late one night last fall, as our entire economic system was spiraling towards collapse, Bernanke, under more pressure than any fed chair has faced in perhaps 60 years, had one big complaint.

He was too busy to go to the Nationals game. He wanted to go. He really wanted to go. But they wouldn't let him. What was the game he was so disappointed to miss? Nationals-Marlins. Tim Redding v. Josh Johnson. It would be the Nationals' 99th loss of the season. Bernanke desperately wanted to be there.

There are lots of DC big wigs who show up in Nationals Park from time to time, usually to root for the opposing team. Not Bernanke. He ditched the Red Sox the minute the Nationals showed up. Kinda makes sense, actually, since he's spent most of his life studying the Great Depression. He's just got a special interest in downward spirals, I guess.

Congratulations, Ben. See you at the Red Porch.

Baseball America Best Tools In Nationals' System

Steven Biel — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 15:38:00 -0400

I didn't see this on NFA or Nationals Journal, so I figured I'd pass along the Nationals listed in Baseball America's minor league best tools, a great annual feature from the house organ of baseball scouting.

BA lists the player with the best tool in each minor league class A and above. The Nationals, emblematic of their organizational talent, got a lot more mentions in the lower levels than in the upper.

Of course, this is subscription-only content, so please folks head over and subscribe so that I don't annoy our friends at BA.

International League (AAA):

Best control: J.D. Martin
Best defensive 2B: Seth Bynum
Best infield arm: Ian Desmond

Eastern League (AA):

Best infield arm: Ian Desmond

Carolina League (high A):

Best control: Brad Meyers
Best defensive shortstop: Danny Espinosa
Best infield arm: Danny Espinosa

South Atlantic League (low A):

Best hitting prospect: Derek Norris
Best power prospect: Derek Norris

Josh Willingham Hits Two Grand Slams—Now Trade Him Already!

Steven Biel — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:56:00 -0400

Josh Willingham is in the midst of a career year. His trade value will never be higher. There's never been a clearer example of a player that should be moved for prospects right now.

After Hammer's double-slammer, I'm reading a lot about how maybe we should keep him after all. It's an understandable reaction from fans, but it's wrong...and it's Rizzo's job to know better.

What exactly is the point of keeping him?

Yes, he has two more years under team control, but he'll be playing on last place teams, regardless. The Scats are, at best, two years from respectability, much less contention.

And, of course, he's solidly on the wrong side of 30. Forget this talk about him being a "young 30." Thirty is 30.

He's having a career year this season (usually that comes two or three years earlier), but regardless—he is undoubtedly peaking now, and the only question is how fast and steep will he decline.

Some skill sets tend to age better than others. Willingham's (like Adam Dunn's) usually doesn't age very well.

The classic "old player skills", as defined by Bill James, are: power, walks, low average, and lack of speed. Players who exhibit these skill sets as a young player tend to age poorly.

Sound familiar? Tom Brunansky is the classic young player with "old player skills." When Brunansky was 29 he had an 11.3-percent walk rate, 22.2-percent K-rate, .164 ISO, and five SBs.

In Willingham's age-29 season, his last full season, he had a 12.0-percent walk rate, 23.4-percent K-rate, .217 ISO, and three SBs. He's Brunansky, except even more.

Here are Willingham's top PECOTA comps: Bubba Trammell (done at 31), Ryan Ludwick (TBD), Bill Renna (bench player at 31, retired at 34), and Leon Roberts (retired at 33).

And in case that wasn't all enough, he's blocking the second most talented player who would be on this team, Elijah Dukes.

Willingham has to be cashed in for what we can get now. Based on what Ryan Garko and Matt Holliday fetched in the last couple weeks, teams are ready to give up significant prospects for veteran help.

Baseball Prospectus speculated about a possible Dunn and Johnson for Tim Alderson deal. Presumably, if Willingham was substituted for Johnson, the package would be sweetened still further. Anything within two counties of that would be a huge win for the Nationals.

This team needs to sell high, buy low, and stockpile talent. Sitting on declining veterans playing for crummy teams until they have no value at all helps nothing.

We missed our chances to turn Nick Johnson into something premium three years ago. Ditto Chad Cordero and Felipe Lopez.

Ronnie Belliard, Cristian Guzman, and Dmitri Young all had moments when they might have returned value from a contender. Instead, we rode them to their absolute lowest value and got (or are on our way to getting) nothing for them.

We can't afford to make the same mistake again.

Are the Washington Nationals Better Than the New York Mets?

Steven Biel — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 05:53:00 -0400

After watching the Scats take two of three from the New York Mets, I think the answer may be yes, right now, the Mets are worse than the Nationals.

Granted, the Mets have had a ton of injuries—and not like the 2008 Nationals who had guys like Paul Lo Duca and Johnny Estrada get hurt. The Mets have actual good players on the DL.

But forget that for now. Let's look match-ups, position-by-position, NFL-style.

Catcher: Josh Bard vs. Brian Schneider
Neither has played much this year, and both are fighting nagging injuries. At first blush, Bard would seem to have the edge based on his 28-point edge in OBP. But that's a mirage—Schneider has him on both walk rate and strikeout rate. When you walk more and get better contact, you're going to get on base more over time.

Neither has much power, but Schneider's .167 ISO is a wee bit better. Brian's has an excellent 35 percent caught-stealing rate, compared to Bard's 24 percent. Advantage: Mets.

First Base: Nick Johnson vs. Daniel Murphy
No contest, Nick in a walk (get it!?). Murphy's OBP is .309, while Johnson's is .415. There's just no overcoming that gap. Both are below-average fielders at this point and neither has much power for a first-bagger. Advantage: Nationals

Second Base: Alberto Gonzalez vs. Luis Castillo
Last season, Castillo looked done. A slap-and-run hitter who had lost his wheels and much of his contact ability, not to mention fielding, he was a wildly overpaid, over-the-hill drag on the team.

This year, he's had a nice little Indian summer of a year. His K-rate is back down to where it was in his salad days with Florida. His range is Virdo-esque, but he's still better than the rotation of suckitude the Scats send out there. Advantage: Mets.

Third Base: Ryan Zimmerman vs. David Wright
Ah, the great debate. I'd take Wright long-term, but Zimmerman has been a bit better this year. Even in a down year, Wright still has the edge at the plate, hitting .316 / .404 / .447 to Zim's .283 / .346 / .465. That 60 points of OBP is huge, but Zimmerman has narrowed the gap offensively.

And Zimmerman is so much better with the glove. Even with the throwing errors, his range is just in another world. It's very close, but... Advantage: Nationals.

Shortstop: Cristian Guzman vs. Alex Cora
Forget shortstop. Just stop. Oy. Since May 9, Guzman has a .289 OBP. He's been just criminally awful, and now he's moping about batting order. Please. He's not a No. 2 hitter. He's just No. 2.

But Cora's no better. He has Tony Pena power and poor on-base skills. Neither can catch the ball. Guzman's hot first month still counts, so I'll give him the edge, though you wouldn't have noticed it this week. Lucky for Guzman that the team picked him up after he handed Angel Pagan the triple+E6=inside-the-park HR. Advantage: Nationals.

Left Field: Adam Dunn vs. Jeremy Reed/Fernando Tatis
Dunn, by a country mile. Dunn can't catch the ball at all, and I dock him half a point for the Bob Seger, but please. Dunn also is better than Gary Sheffield, though it's closer than you think. Advantage: Nationals.

Center Field: Nyjer Morgan vs. Angel Pagan
Morgan is finally showing Nationals fans what a really good fielder in center looks like. You're not hearing much whining about Endy this and Nook that. Because a) Morgan is a far better fielder than those two, a truly special gloveman, and b) Morgan can hit a good bit too.

It's time for Fizzleman to dial down the green light every single time Morgan's on base a little, but other than that he's getting on base and changing the game in the field. Pagan has had a nice little run of luck, with a .388 BABIP. But he's 28 and really can't hit. He's average at best in center. Advantage: Nationals

Right Field: Josh Willingham vs. Jeff Francoeur
There might have been a debate about Hammer v. Church, but Frenchy's just terrible. He's having a little hot streak, but his OBP for the year is .289. You shouldn't have a starting catcher who does that. Forget right field. Advantage: Nationals

Bench: Willie Harris/Ronnie Belliard/Austin Kearns vs. Cory Sullivan/Angel Berroa/Omir Santos
When Sheffield is back, that will push Tatis and Reed to the bench. Will that make the bench any better? Who knows. I'll give it to the Nationals beacuse the only player here who should be actually getting paid to play this game is Harris.

No. 1 Starting Pitcher: Johan Santana vs. John Lannan
We love our Johnny, but he's got a long way to go till he's the best lefty in the NL East. Advantage: Mets.

No. 2 Starting Pitcher: Jordan Zimmermann vs. Mike Pelfrey
Arright, I admit, it's a little home cooking. I started this post before the elbow soreness, and the question posed was whether the Nationals were better than the Mets at that moment, as that series took place.

If you think I spin too much positive for the Scats, make sure you tell their PR staff next time you see one of them, cuz they seems to think otherwise. Anyway, Young Hova was on his way to winning rookie of the year. He's got Pelfrey by three-quarters of a run in FIP, and more impressive his K:BB ratio is more than double Pelfrey's. Avantage: Nationals.

No. 3 Starting Pitcher: Craig Stammen vs. Livan Hernandez
Stammen bests Livo in ERA, FIP, groundball rate, and walk rate. Hernandez has a few more Ks, but his K:BB ratio is almost a full K behind. And Craig is so much easier on the eyes. Advantage: Nationals

No. 4 Starting Pitcher: Garrett Mock vs. Oliver Perez
The Loopy Lefty is walking 8.84 per 9. Seriously. That's worse than Daniel Cabrera. And he's a flyball pitcher. Really, this year he's line-drive pitcher, giving up 25.4% liners on balls in play.

But Mock? Kid has one start, and he gave up seven runs in 3.1 innings. Granted, three were unearned. Perez actually has him on ERA, 7.68 to 7.71. Call it a push. Advantage: Hitters.

No. 5 Starting Pitcher: J.D. Martin vs. Fernando Nieve
It's tough to evaluate either of these guys, but the baseball card says Nieve has a 2.45 ERA in 36.2 IP. That'll do. Advantage: Mets.

Closer: Mike MacDougal vs. Francisco Rodriguez
Moving right along... Advantage: Mets

Set-up Man: Joe Beimel/Sean Burnett vs. Pedro Feliciano/Sean Green
Feliciano has been very good, and Green's been no worse than Beimel. Hard to really have a "set up man" on teams that so rarely win. Advantage: Mets

So in sum, we have six positions where the advantage goes to the Mets. That leaves nine for the Scats and one tie.

Does this prove that the Nationals are a better team? No. It's just food for thought. But it's certainly the case that the Nationals won for real. And if Omar Minaya really think's he's making a run, he needs to just stop talking.

Welcome Back Bally Star

Steven Biel — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:28:00 -0400

Eighteen months ago, Collin Balester was coming off an appearance in the Futures Game and ranked by Baseball America as the No. 3 prospect in the Nationals' organization, ahead of Jordan Zimmermann and anyone else not named Ross Detwiler.

Since then, he's been passed in the system by Craig Stammen and Zimmermann, and Shairon Martis and J.D. Martin got chances before he did. But the fact of the matter is that Bally Star has as good a shot as anyone of being a starter on a good Nationals team in about three or four years.

His fastball sits at 91-92 and can reach 95. It has has good movement and velocity, and if he can spot it, he can get by without much else. The problem is that he has to develop something else, and if he's not commanding his off-speed stuff he tends to rely too much on the fastball.

The curveball is his next best pitch, but it can have a bit of a "hump" in it and be too easily recognized by Major League hitters. The change-up is the pitch that will allow him to succeed as a starter. Last year, it was his third best pitch, but young pitchers often develop their change late. It needs to come in around 81-82 for strikes to work, and too often it's a ball at 85-86.

Last year, it's easy to forget that he was pretty darn good in 14 starts last year, putting up a 4.83 ERA, darn good for a 22-year-old rookie. Unfortunately, there was a 15th start, a disaster in Philly in which he looked like he's started the off-season a week early and gave up seven earned runs in 1.2 innings, raising that ERA to 5.51.

This year has been a rough one for him. His strikeouts and walks both regressed, he lost his spot in the opening day rotation, and he's been digging his way out since. But his groundball rates have improved, and he's been solid over the last month.

Today, he's back, and if he pitches well he could be here for a while, since Scott Olsen is done (thank God) and Jordan Zimmermann probably won't pitcher for a while.

Don't forget to root for him, because he's still one of the prospects who will determine the near-term future of this team.

I Guess Someone Wanted FLop After All...

Steven Biel — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 11:57:00 -0400

A year ago around this time, the Nationals released Felipe Lopez outright. He had become such a drag on the team, that they were happy to pay him to go away.

Yesterday, the Arizona Diamondbacks traded Lopez to the Brewers for two minor leaguers, High-A right-hander Roque Mercedes and Triple-A outfielder Cole Gillespie.

Gillespie, 25, was a third round pick in 2006 and was rated the ninth best prospect in the Brewers system by Baseball America. He's an unspectacular but all-around solid player who should become a useful fourth outfielder, at least.

Mercedes, 22, has a 1.08 ERA with 45 strikeouts in 41.6 innings in the pitcher-friendly Florida State League.

Neither of these players are franchise-changers, and this isn't a deal that could have happened by the time Lopez was cut by the Scats, but still it's frustrating to see a team get value in return for a guy we paid to go away a year ago.

Even more galling, the Brewers will be in line to get an extra draft pick if he is offered and declines arbitration this off season, since Lopez is likely to qualify as a type-B free agent.

Put this on the long list of "buy high, sell low" roster mismanagement episodes from the Bowden years.

The Nationals' Lost Weak-End: Nearing a Milestone

Steven Biel — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 05:04:00 -0400

Today, I felt like I was seeing something pretty rare in pro sports—a team has completely, totally given up.

Manny's teams never did that in 2007 or 2008, and though there were days that they seemed to be mailing it in, he had a knack for pulling them back and re-focusing them on the task at hand.

If Jim Riggleman can't do that, if the effort we saw today becomes par for the course over the next 70 games, the Nationals could be just the third team since World War II to lose 75 percent of its games.

That's something I've always assumed couldn't really happen.

The collapse started last night. Going into the sixth on Saturday, the Scats were up 4-2. Cubs starter Randy Wells was done for the night. Flash Jordan Zimmermann—the best damn rookie pitcher in baseball—was dealing, with eight Ks, four hits, and just one walk.

At that moment, the Nationals had a 78 percent` chance of winning. If there was ever a game this team was in line to win, this was it.

But they somehow found a way to lose.

Derrick Lee hit a flyball to left field that would have been caught by any remotely average outfielder. Dunn, who I'll politely say could have run harder, couldn't get there, and the ball fell in for a ground-rule double. Then Aramis Ramirez hit a grounder at Willie Harris, who, looking like he was more worried about the family jewels than making the play, basically fell over.

So, instead of two outs, no one on, and an 83.6 percent win expectancy, it was no outs, runners on second and third, and a 60.2 percent WE.

Zimmermann blew away Milton Bradley, but on his 100th pitch and after the inning should have been over, Alfonso Soriano poked a game-tying homer to the opposite field. Three-and-a-half innings and eight stranded Nationals later, Zimmermann, completely hung out to dry by his "teammates," and was handed one of the least deserving losses you'll ever see a pitcher get.

Today, Garrett Mock and the Nationals were game for the first three innings. The Cubs were getting some good swings, but Mock rung up three strikeouts in the second and got a couple dandy double-plays turned by Ryan Zimmerman, especially this one in the first.

But at the first sign of adversity, the team rolled over like Belgium in wartime.

Alberto Gonzalez's lazy footwork caused an error that should have been the second out of the inning. You know what followed. Homer, single, wild pitch, walk, single, wild pitch, single, pitching change, sac fly, single, single, single, and frozen rope at right at Dunn for the third merciful out.

Later, we got to see Ronnie Belliard dogging it on the base paths (sliding is for sissies), a throwing error by Nyjer Morgan, an 0-for-5 with RISP, and a complete inability to mount anything resembling a comeback against Kevin Hart, a guy who was once traded for Freddie Bynum, and the Cubs' merry band of mop-up men.

In the end, it was 11-3, and it could have been worse. Remember, Lou Piniella rested two of his team's best hitters, Aramis Ramirez and Milton Bradley.

We'll see if the team can mount any kind of resistance to the Mets this week. Outside of David Wright, New York is a AAA team right now, with an all-star team's worth of players on their DL.

If they don't, the 2003 Detroit Tigers may get some company.

Revisiting the Pre-Season Predictions

Steven Biel — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 10:20:00 -0400

With the mid-point of the season approaching, now seems like a good time to check in on my pre-season predictions.

Nick Johnson, Ryan Zimmerman, Lastings Milledge, Jason Bergmann, and Austin Kearns will be better in 2009 than they were in 2008.
Well... I got the first two right. If you factor in Bergmann's 0.97 ERA at Syracuse I think you'd actually have to say he's been better, but this isn't what I had in mind. Who knows what Milledge would be doing right now if he'd stayed in DC and stayed healthy. As for Kearns, who knew he could be worse?

Cristian Guzman, John Lannan, Joe Beimel, Joel Hanrahan, Anderson Hernandez, Ronnie Belliard, and Scott Olsen will be worse.
One could make a case for Lannan being improved, but his strikeout rate and groundball rate are both down. So are his walks, but he really isn't improved at all. The rest of these guys I way, way too right about.

Ryan Zimmerman will finally take the next step forward, finishing the season with a slash line over .280 / .350 / .480. But he will not make the All-Star team.
He's currently at .296 / .369 / .486. The all-star game was seeming like a lock a few weeks ago, but it's not hard to imagine Dunn getting it and the NL team taking David Wright, Chipper Jones, Mark Reynolds, or even Pablo Sandoval ahead of Zimm.

Josh Bard will get more than one-third of the starts at catcher.
If I remember right, I was going to predict that he'd get more starts than any other catcher on the team, figuring he'd pass Wil Nieves and that there was a decent chance that Flores would either need to be sent down or get hurt. But I wimped out. Seems like I should have had the nerve to go with my first instinct.

Nationals Park will emerge as a very slight hitters park as measured by park factor. Sample size is still too small to be conclusive, but so far I've been wrong here. I thought the left-handed power of Dunn would expose the short-porch in right, but I didn't account for the fact that Dunn's homers go about 900 feet.

The Nationals will draw fewer than two million fans. This was a cheapy. They're at 871,373, which puts them on pace for 1.85 million.

Jason Bergmann will have a better ERA than any of the Nationals' top five starters by games started. Can I say I meant at Syracuse?

Mike Rizzo will find room for Alberto Gonzalez on the 25-man roster by the end of May at the latest. Bingo.

Cristian Guzman, Wily Mo Pena, Dmitri Young, and Ron Belliard will be former Nationals by the end of the season. Pena's gone, and it's not hard to imagine Belliard getting released soon. Young, I suppose, will hang on at this point. I've been hoping for a Guzman trade for more than a year, but his contract and declining range mean we're probably stuck with him.

Austin Kearns will have a solid bounce-back season and find himself a starting job with another team by opening day 2010. Nevermind.

Adam Dunn's streak of 40-HR seasons will end.
Did I say this?

Jordan Zimmermann's ERA will be below the 2008 starting pitcher NL average of 4.40. For a rookie, this is a bigger achievement than it may seem. He's currently at 4.65, but I still like his chances to make it.

Despite recent additions, the bullpen will be in the bottom third of the NL for ERA.
I can't say I expected this.

Nationals starting pitchers will throw the fewest innings of any team in the NL.
At 5.6 innings per start, we're actually a bit ahead of last-place San Diego, who's at 5.5, and three other teams are tied with us at 5.6.

Scott Olsen will not finish the year in the Nationals rotation.
The next month will tell the tale.

The Nationals' top five starting pitchers by IP as a starter will include at least one pitcher not currently with the organization. I figured they'd have to go to the scrap heap when Cabrera and Olsen flamed out, but due to the success of the young arms, it's looking like this won't be necessary.

Strasburg will be the pick, and he will sign.
I've jinxed it, clearly.

Aaron Crow will get the $4.4 million he wanted last year.
Not gonna happen.

Shawn Hill will finish the season with more win shares than the Nationals' fifth starter.
Hardball Times doesn't update Win Shares mid-season, but looking at a similar stat, wins above replacement, he's currently at +0.1. Cabrera finished at -0.3, and Olsen's at 0.0. Remember, WAR and WS are counting stats--getting beat by an injured player in this category is no different than getting beat in HR or RBI.

Nick Johnson will get 500 at bats and finish the season with an OPS+ over 140.
I was a little overzealous here. His OPS+ is currently 125, and 140 would require quite a second half. Still, it's hard to believe so many fans were ready to kick him to the curb six months ago.

Mike Rizzo will lose the "acting" and be named the new Nationals GM.
We'll see.

Manny Acta will get another year.
Looks more likely now than it did two weeks ago.

NL playoff teams: Mets, Dodgers, Cubs, D'Backs.
I could still be right on three of four.

AL playoff teams: Yankees, Red Sox, Tigers, Angels.
Tigers make me look smart. Angels are right there. I could get all these right.

The Dodgers will beat the Yankees in the Series.
We'll see.

The Nationals record will be 74-88, their fourth last place finish in five years.
They'd have to go 53-37 the rest of the way to make this mark.

Elijah Gets Passed Over

Steven Biel — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 15:51:00 -0400

I don't have much to say about this move. I don't like it, of course, as one of the biggest fans of Dukes around. He's in a slump, but between his solid right-field defense and rare combination of patience, power and contact skills, he's arguably the most valuable player on the team after Ryan Zimmerman.

I also think that with Morgan in the fold and Harris available as another back-up infielder that there's no value in keeping Ron Belliard around. He's done and needs to retire.

Still, it's hard not to recognize that Josh Willingham is having the best year of his career, judging by rate stats. He deserves to play.

Really what needs to happen is the team needs to finally unclog this logjam and make a move. And that move seems imminent. Unfortunately, it appears that it's Dukes, the most talented and youngest player among the glut of corner outfielders, is on his way out.

Maybe that's not right. Rizzo insists it's a baseball move resulting from Dukes's slump and Hammer's hot streak, and that they just want to make sure that Dukes can play every day. And if this is a short-term move while the team figures out how to move Josh Willingham, then that's fine.

But with all the talk about "changing the culture" and bringing in "good clubhouse guys," it's hard not to think Dukes is done in DC.

Which is a shame. Jim Bowden did some good things here, and getting Dukes for next to nothing was the very best single move he made. It's still impossible to imagine the team getting equal win value for Dukes, given all the baggage he still carries, despite more or less two years of model citizenship with the Nationals.

We still have to withhold judgment, but if the team is sending off its most talented players in favor of nice guys who show up on time but can't hit a lick, fans have reason to worry.

Jason Bergmann: Exclusive Interview with FJB

Steven Biel — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 09:21:00 -0400

As anyone who's spent any time on this blog knows, I'm a big fan of Jason Bergmann. He's a fantastic guy, and while he'll never win any Cy Young awards, I think it's pretty much an embarrassment that he's spent a day in AAA over the last three years.

I see his short-comings as much as anyone. I just don't believe there's been a moment over that time that he wasn't as good or better than at least one pitcher in the rotation or bullpen (At the moment, I'd surely take him over Kip Wells, for instance).

Not long ago, while he was still in his rightful place on the Nationals' 25-man roster, Jason agreed to do an interview with FJB. Then, after just one very rough outing, he was sent down. I figured an interview with a blogger would be the last thing on his mind.

I was wrong. It says a lot about the guy's appreciation of the fans that even after getting once again bent over by the team (he's too classy to say that, but I'm not), he still did the interview. Enjoy.

First of all, tell us something we as fans might not know about what it's really like to be a Major Leaguer.

Hey, no problem. I actually enjoy speaking out to the fans via question and answers. I really think it helps the fan and player relate a little more.

To keep it short, I think people usually conclude that being a Major League player is a piece of cake and that we just show up, play a game and then go out to clubs and party. Total misconception about our lives!

Many ballplayers arrive at the field between 1 and 2 PM and take extra everything (extra defense, hitting, video, etc.). We stretch, throw, run, take BP, have pitchers/hitters meetings and then fuel up with some food and head back onto the field to take on the other team.

Most guys stick around after the game for a while and talk about at-bats or pitching sequences on certain hitters. Some guys wind up leaving the field at 11-12 PM. All in all, it turns into a 10-11 hour day at the field.

Who are your best friends in the Nationals organization?

The Nationals organization is the only one I have known in my career. I am happy to say that there are many good people who play for this team. Many of the guys are very approachable and being such a young group, the guys stick together more. I feel that I have a connection with everyone on the team and that I wouldn't say any one player is a bad apple or sore thumb.

That being said, most hitters hang with hitters and most pitchers stick around the other pitchers. I, obviously, am more in sync with the pitchers!

What coaches over your career have helped you the most?

I think a lot of coaches have been a help to me along the way. Reggie Jackson was a pitching coach in Savannah back in 2004. While I was on the disabled list with a broken toe, he helped me develop my slider. That was a great because it added another dimension to my pitching strategy.

Ricky Bones the following year kept pounding into my head that all I had to do to be successful was throw the ball down. He was the first coach that got through to me with that, and I believe I have heard it now from every other coach.

Steve McCatty has been a wonderful teacher and someone who I can rely upon to be perfectly honest and blunt when I ask a question. That quality helps Cat and I stay on the same page. I don't know how much I learn from him as much as he keeps me in line.

Randy St. Claire was my first MLB pitching coach. He put in long hours on the computer and in the bullpen keeping my mechanics correct. I think that his tireless work has definitely increased my Major League career length.

Nationals and former Expos Scouting Director Dana Brown seems to have a particular affection for pitchers from the NY/NJ area. I'm thinking of you, John Lannan, Sean Black (who was a second round pick a few years ago who didn't sign), and there are several others, especially in later rounds. What makes you Jersey boy so tough?

I am not sure it's a Jersey boy thing or not, but I know Dana is from the area and has a soft spot for it.

I am sure there is a notion amongst the scouts that while the southern states are able to play more baseball year round, the northern guys such as myself and Lannan are subject to shorter seasons due to weather. This, some may argue, might lead to less strain on the arm as a younger player. This may increase our career length on the back end. Who knows? I hope all those snowy and rainy days pay off!

You've tended in the past to be a pitcher who's struggled with left-handed hitting. For fans who don't know as much about pitching, why do you tend to have so much more success getting right-handed hitters out?

That's a good question and one I am not sure I can fully answer. I believe a lot of it has to do with the simple fact that I walk more lefties and thus causing the overall at-bats against lefties to decrease. Also, right-handed batters are more common, and I have faced so many more over the years. I feel a little more comfortable with them.

The other night, you talked about not "staying on top" of your two-seam fastball. Again, for fans who aren't yet as familiar, tell us what that means.

Finger placement upon release. When fingers stay on top of the ball, it is easier to "power" down through the ball and attain some ball-action. When fingers are on the side of the ball, it can stay more flat and lose the desired movement. This philosophy is also applied to the slider and curveball. If fingers are on the side of breaking balls, they appear flat. We call those "cement-mixers"—pitches that spin but don't do anything.

You've also tended to be a pitcher who's had pretty strong flyball tendencies. Certainly, back in RFK with its large dimensions, that wasn't too much of a impediment to success, but in general it can lead to a lot of homers. Is that something you think about as a pitcher? And do you do things to try to develop more groundball stuff?

Also, I can't remember ever reading that you threw a two-seamer before. Is that a new pitcher for you, or did I just miss that part of your repertoire?

Yeah, I just started primarily throwing a two-seam "sinker" last month after being sent down. I had a long conversation with Steve McCatty and Spin Williams based upon how my extreme flyball pitcher status probably caused me to have a lot less success. Cat has tried to get me on a sinker for a while, but either through ignorance or ineffectiveness, I hadn't put full effort into it. I really try to throw it all the time—even in warm-up tosses to get the feel for it. I believe that I can change my extreme flyball status to average or groundball status. If able to do so, I may have found an important tool to extending my career and success.

I've written on the blog many times that I think you've been treated somewhat unfairly by the team, getting yanked from the rotation and sent down to the Minors several times after just one bad outing. You obviously aren't going to criticize your employer, and I don't want you to. But I wonder, do you think all the back and forth to AAA has affected your development as a pitcher?

I first want to point out that it flat out stinks getting sent down, under any circumstance.

I think that there are some instances where flip-flopping from starting and relieving helped a lot. Mostly the areas that were helped out were mental.

The mindset starting versus relieving greatly differs, but I feel after doing both it just comes down to: pitching is pitching whether starting or relieving, balls over the plate are strikes, balls that are not are simply balls. That doesn't change from starting to relieving.

I would like to stay in one role and work on that as much as possible, though.

Anyone who's met you or been around you knows what a nice guy you are. You spend time with fans and kids as much or more than anybody on the team, and always have. Is that something you learned from other veteran players, or is that just your personality?

I enjoy being around people and engaging them in conversation or helping them out along the way. I feel that I have a very outgoing personality and encourage kids and fans to ask questions about things they are uncertain or curious about. Any experiences I have had I like to share with people.

There are times when I forget that my job is a dream and that I take my place in peoples lives for granted. I come to the ballpark and absolutely love it, but it changes over the years from a long-shot to a reality—a reality with very hard work and little room for failure.

I try to give back a little to the fans and the kids, whether it be a batting practice ball thrown into the stands or some field-stands interaction, or especially a Q&A with an esteemed blogger!

This year, the Nationals in spring training immediately declared you as a reliever, even though I think a lot of fans could see that you were performing as well or better than some of the starters who broke camp in the rotation, and your performance in 2007 especially was outstanding as a starter. Do you see yourself as more of a starter or a reliever going forward?

As I said above, I am a pitcher. I have said this for a few years now. I want the ball. I have had success and failure. I get better with each. No one is perfect, but I want to be.

In spring, I went up to Manny Acta and asked him what my role was going to be. I did this to not be confused and in order to apply myself to one role fully. I just want to pitch and pitch in the Major Leagues.

There are a lot of rumors about Manny Acta's job security right now. Tell us about your experiences with him as a manager.

Manny is quiet on the outside, but has a lot of fire and passion for the game. He is definitely a player's manager and treats everyone with respect. I'm not saying he is a pushover, just that he is fair.

How about Randy St. Clair? He was fired a couple weeks back as pitching coach, and for a long time he was the only MLB pitching coach you'd ever had.

Saint was indeed the very first pitching coach I had. Like I said before, he was a tireless worker who never gave up on anyone. I definitely believe another team will give him a shot once again to be a Major League pitching coach. He deserved better than getting fired, but the bottom line is the pitching staff was not pitching well and that falls on the pitching coach.

Why do some pitchers jump over the first base or third base line on the way back to the dugout? I've always thought this was silly.

I have no idea. I walk or jog in and out never touching the lines, but certainly not hopping over it! I know everyone has their own superstitions and little idiosyncrasies and maybe that plays a part! I think the only little gimmick I have is always walking around the first base side of the mound. The third base side of the mound is like a foreign place for me!

If you could choose between pitching in the NL and getting to hit or pitching in the AL with the DH, which would you choose?

Either! Really, they both have their ups and downs. Certainly, the NL is more appealing because of the simple fact that there is another pitcher in the lineup instead of a designated hitter!

The downside of the NL is of course being that pitcher and in tight games being pinch hit for. The AL allows you to go deeper into games based simply on the fact that no pinch hitter will be needed in the sixth to replace the pitcher. However, the DH brings an added offensive force that offsets it! Each league is fairly balanced, though!

Red Sox = Yankees + Hypocrisy

Steven Biel — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:26:00 -0400

Red Sox President Larry Lucchino once famously called the Yankees the "evil empire" for outspending the opposition en route to championship after championship. With a fanbase that carried itself with the self-important entitlement of a Hilton heir, the Yankees have forever been the team that all right-thinking fans loved to hate.

Today, Red Sox and the Yankees have melded into one axis of evil, each outspending the rest of the league and undermining the sense of fair competition.

(By the way, it's this sense that the game is rigged that really is the objectionable thing about all this. The appeal of sports is that it's a fair, honest competition, where the underdog can have his day and the big shots have to prove themselves day in and day out. By letting a few teams buy their way into contention every year, baseball feels corrupt and unfair. In other words, it's less fun.)

Sure, the Yankees at $201 million still spend significantly more than anyone else, but if you're a fan in Tampa or St. Paul or Pittsburgh, is it really that much more outrageous to see a team outspending you by three times rather than just double?

But here's the thing that really gets my goat about the Red Sox. Yankees fans know they're rooting for Darth Vader, Exxon-Mobil, and Ivan Drago all rolled into one. That's who they are, and they revel in it.

But when they lose, especially when they lose to the Nationals, they have to suffer all the embarrassment of losing despite their titanic advantages. The old saying goes—the bigger they are, the harder they fall. Well, the Yankees every year set themselves up for the biggest, hardest fall, and they take those lumps honestly.

Red Sox fans on the other hand try to have it both ways. They run their team like Darth Vader, but they still want you to believe they're Luke Skywalker. They act like they're still the sweet innocent white hat, and all the while they're stealing your lunch just like Darth Vader. (Sorry for the triple-mixed metaphors.)

So to all you DC-based Red Sox fans who will fill the stadium tonight—if you want to root for an underdog, it's time to don Nationals red. Otherwise, it's time to come clean.

You're all Yankees fans now.

Strasburg, Then Signability

Steven Biel — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 08:36:00 -0400

On the first day of the draft, the Nationals made the choice that everyone knew they'd make with the top pick, and then appear to have gone right for sign-ability picks down the line.

It's the right decision.

At No. 10, the Nats took Stanford closer Drew Storen. The pick isn't a huge reach, but relief pitchers have limited value and therefore limited upside. Storen would be foolish to try to drive a hard bargain on the signing bonus. His best bet is clearly to get to DC fast and start that arbitration clock ticking.

At No. 50, Washington selected UC-Berkeley second baseman Jeffery Kobernus. We're told he's a solid defender without overwhelming tools or a particularly big bat. He's been compared to Mark Grudzielanek.

Again, not a huge reach, but a safe pick, and with limited upside one would think he's an easy sign. He also fills a short-term need and has a chance to start his arbitration clock soon as well.

It seems as though the safe route could also produce some solid, if not unspectacular players.

Finally, at pick 81, the Nationals took University of Georgia righty Trevor Holder. Baseball America expected him to last much longer, and he's projected at best as an innings-eating mid-rotation guy, if that. This is the pick that is getting panned as a pure reach.

Let me be clear that I'm no scout. I haven't seen any of these guys, and even if I had, I sure as shootin' know that I'm in no position to match scouting chops with Mike Rizzo and Dana Brown (Bowden, maybe).

The argument against these picks is that, if the blurbs on MLB.com and Baseball America are right, these guys just don't have much upside. They're fungible.

Aside from the rare really special closer, relief pitchers aren't that hard to come by. Middling hitters who can turn a double play at the keystone are a dime-a-dozen. Ditto for inning-eating righties.

Why bother drafting the next Mark Grudzielanek and Braden Looper when you can get the original versions cheaply with less risk anytime?

All that said, if the Lerners told Rizzo, "look, you can spend what it takes to get Strasburg, but we don't want to hear a sales pitch on anyone else," then I appreciate that at least the team seems on the same page.

Last year, you had an owner committed to signing for slot and little more with the top pick, and Dana Brown took a known sign-ability risk. The team could have (and I believe would have) taken Justin Smoak at No. 9 last year if it had been clear up and down the organization that the bonus for No. 1 was capped at $3.3 million.

One other thing.

There was a little part of me that thought the Nationals might just do the unmentionable and pass on Strasburg, but thankfully that didn't happen so there's a lot of relief there.

Still, I'm now to the point where I consider it a 50-50 proposition at best whether they get him signed. Stan Kasten's statement in GQ reminds everyone that Kasten is at least as focused on making a statement about the "system" as helping the Nationals win:

"We know what No. 1 picks get; we expect to sign our guy. The system isn’t going to change for any one circumstance, for any one situation. We know how players get drafted, how they get paid, how long it takes them to develop, what steps are necessary."

A year ago at this time, I would have dismissed such talk as mere posturing, a distasteful, but probably inevitable public negotiating tactic.

After the Aaron Crow experience, I asked Kasten directly (phrasing the question about five different ways) why he would do something that clearly hurts his team on the field and also from a business perspective. He never denied that his refusal to sign Crow over a few hundred thousand dollars hurt the Nationals. His argument has always been about protecting the system and the power of the owners over the players.

So I expect the team to engage in the Strasburg negotiation with the same mixed motivations: sure, they want to help the Nationals win, but they also want to make a point about the need for a hard cap on salaries and draft bonuses.

Which do they care about more?

We'll see.

Draft Economics 101

Steven Biel — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 22:29:00 -0400

The last week saw the beginning of what will undoubtedly be several weeks of heated discourse about the economics of Major League Baseball. People will say the Lerners are cheap, and probably far more people will say that Stephen Strasburg is greedy, and almost everyone will say that Scott Boras is evil.

To try to make this conversation as informative and informed as possible, I thought it would be worth presenting some basic facts about the economics of the baseball draft.

1. Drafted Players Have Very, Very Little Negotiating Leverage

A drafted player can only negotiate with one team, and the player must either accept whatever the team offers him or wait a year, risking injury and sacrificing a year of prime earning to take his chances on the same rigged system the next year.

The reason it's so rare for a draft pick to go unsigned is because the players have so few options.

2. Players Would Make More Money in a Free Market—Some, a Lot More

If draftees were allowed to peddle their services to the employers (read: teams) of their choice, they would make far more money. Those at the top of the draft would earn many times more money.

Daisuke Matsuzaka's contract gives us some idea of the market value of a very highly touted prospect. The Red Sox spent $103.11 ($51.11 million posting fee, plus a six-year, $52 million contract) to get him as a 26-year-old rookie free agent out of Japan. There's no cheaper way to acquire premium talent than the draft.

3. Teams Can Pay Players Whatever They Want for Three Full MLB Seasons after They Are Drafted

The major league minimum is about $400,000. Minor league players make much less than that. Therefore, whatever draft bonus a player gets, it's fair to assume that it'll be at least four to five years before he sees any more big money.

In the case of high school players, it could be more like seven to eight years or more to arbitration. If a player gets hurt during that time, he's SOL. So when a player gets a signing bonus of $X million, think of that as a salary spread over four to eight years, and it won't seem like quite so much.

4. MLB Player Salaries Account for a Little More Than Half the Total Revenue in Baseball

Personally, I think that sounds like a perfectly reasonable share of the spoils. Prior to free agency, player salaries were only about 25 percent to 30 percent of league revenue, depending on the year.

Those who believe the players should earn less should explain why they think the owners deserve more. In a rigged monopoly where they face no risk whatsoever, what value do they add?

Investors in a free market face risk. In baseball, fat cats angle for the opportunity to invest, because big profits are a lead pipe cinch.

5. The Player's Union Doesn't Represent Amateur Draftees

In fact, the interests of current players are in conflict with draftees. At some level, player salaries are zero sum. If draftees get bigger bonuses, there's less money left for the current players represented by the union.

6. Players Are Entitled to Competent Representation

If you go to court, you hire a lawyer. If you're going to invest in the stock market, it's a good idea to get a broker to advise you. If you're selling or buying a house, you probably are going to hire a realtor.

Likewise, if you were drafted by a major league baseball team, you'd get an agent. And if you want to hire a hardball badass, that's your prerogative as well.

7. Scott Boras Is Good at His Job

Jerry Reinsdorf and Bud Selig got caught colluding illegally to rig the free agent market, cheating the players out of $280 million. Scouts have been caught stealing thousands from young Dominicans and teams by skimming bonuses.

Scott Boras has never even been accused of anything like this. He's guilty of nothing more than representing his clients effectively, which of course is what he's paid to do.

8. Potential Has Value

You hear all the time during draft time that it's ridiculous that so-and-so wants so much money when he hasn't even played a single inning. This is a particularly uninformed rant. In every market in our economy, potential has value, often a lot of value.

If I think, based on geological formations, that there's oil under your land, then your land will be worth more. There are entire markets—futures markets—all about betting on the future value of commodities.

9. The Slot System Was Unilaterally Imposed by Owners and Has Never Been Supported by Players—Neither Pros Nor Amateurs

If the owners got together and decided that all free agents would get one-year deals worth $5 million, and no more, that'd be collusion. Similar coordination with amateur draftees is called the "slot system."

10. Teams That Refuse To Pay for Premium Talent in the Draft, Do So at Their Own Risk

Daniel Moskos over Matt Wieters. Matt Bush over Justin Verlander. Brian Bullington over B.J. Upton.

Almost every year brings another cautionary tale. Good players cost a little more. Bad teams don't pay.

Steve McCatty and the "Good Old Days"

Steven Biel — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 22:35:00 -0400

There's been a lot of talk since Randy St. Claire was replaced by Steve McCatty as pitching coach about the "good old days" when teams didn't worry about pitch counts and pitchers expected to go nine every time out.

Rob Dibble in particular has been vocal about how pitchers today are babied and waxing nostalgic about the 1980 Oakland A's starting rotation of McCatty, Matt Keough, Mike Norris, Rick Langford and Brian Kingman.

They were five young stars, and together they graced the cover of Sports Illustrated on Apr. 27, 1981 with a headline, "The Amazing A's and their Five Aces."

Here are the ages and key stats for the five in 1980:

McCatty (26): 221.6 IP, 3.38 ERA
Norris (25): 284.3 IP, 2.54 ERA
Langford (28): 290 IP, 3.26 ERA
Keough (24): 250 IP, 2.92 ERA
Kingman (25): 211.3 IP, 3.83 ERA

Together, the groups pitched 94 complete games that year. Four times, an A's starter pitched a 14-inning complete game. Langford started one game that season on two days rest and at one point threw 22 complete games in a row.

Norris said of manager Billy Martin, "He made you feel as if you had feminine tendencies if you wanted to come out."

To listen to Dibble, you'd think this was all just the way it should be, and that McCatty will hopefully lead the team to a throwback era where men were men and pitchers finished what they started.

Well, if you've been paying any attention to the last 40 years of sports medicine, you know where this is going. All five of the A's aces were done as effective major league pitchers within three years of that SI cover.

Norris declined for two seasons, had shoulder surgery after the 1983 season, and, but for a brief comeback at age 35 in 1990, he was done at age 28.

Langford pitched through pain (not very well) in 1982, had elbow surgery in 1983, and was done as a starting pitcher at age 30.

Keough started feeling shoulder pain in May of 1981 when he slipped on a wet mound in the middle of his throwing motion. He gutted out that season, but his ERA jumped to 5.72 in '82, and he was out of baseball at age 30.

Kingman didn't get hurt, but Martin, showing that he was as dumb about stats as he was about pitcher health, blamed Kingman for losing 20 games in 1981. He had a 3.83 ERA that year but got a minuscule 2.87 runs per game of support, and, of course, Martin made him pitch deep into every game, so he always got the decision.

He apparently didn't get along with Martin (can't imagine why) and eventually got himself sent to the minors and then traded. He was out of baseball at age 29.

For McCatty, the shoulder pain started in '82. Here's how he described it to SI in 1983: "Nineteen eighty-two and-three were the most miserable years I've ever been a part of. I pitched when it felt like my arm was going to come right out of the socket.

I'd have tears in my eyes, and in my mind I'd say to the guy at the plate, 'Hit this one, for God's sake, so I don't have to throw another.'" Still, he pitched. The injuries eroded his effectiveness quickly, and he was out of baseball by 1986 at age 31.

Now, it's certainly possible and in fact likely that none of this reflects on McCatty the pitching coach. When it comes to pitcher abuse, he played in the dark ages, and we've come a long way. If anything, I would guess his experience taught him just how dangerous it can be to pitch tired.

But when you hear Dibble and others complain about how wimpy pitchers are and how big player salaries have made teams too cautious, remember Oakland's amazing five aces. Talent is a terrible thing to waste, and I for one am glad that those "good old days" are long gone.

Fecal Gravity at Nationals Park

Steven Biel — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 08:43:00 -0400

As they say, stuff rolls downhill.

The Nationals are the worst organization in the majors because of dyfunctional management starting with Mark Lerner, Stan Kasten, and Jim Bowden. But when things get ugly, it's the middle relievers, bench coaches, and now Randy St. Claire who take the fall.

Remember, Bowden was never fired. He was allowed to resign, with a teary-eyed speech about how he's about the name on the front of the jersey, not the back. And that was after four-plus years of some of the worst GM-ing the world's ever seen.

The Nationals aren't the first organization where accountability functioned in inverse proportion to authority. Legions of GM workers got their walking papers before Rick Wagoner finally had to face the music. Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld signed off on torture and invaded Iraq without a plan, and it's Lynndie England who takes the fall.

Of course, it doesn't have to be this way. There are healthy, functioning organizations out there where the buck stops at the top in a meaningful way. Scapegoating down is often a sign of a poorly-run operation, and the Nationals have it down cold.

After all, if you were going to lay the blame at one person's feet, who would it be? Kasten? Well, he didn't want Bowden in the first place, so you can't hardly blame him for the mess he wrought. Rizzo? Dude just got here. Bowden? Yeah, that's clearly the person I think is most at fault, but even he didn't get to hire his own people. Rizzo was imposed on him, he inherited Dana Brown, and he didn't have Kasten's support.

And of course, Manny inherited St. Claire. Bowden kept him on. Would Acta have picked him if he'd had a chance to hire his own coaches? Who knows? And then yesterday we were told that Rizzo fired St. Claire, not Manny.

The only solution here is to clean house. Put someone in charge of everything, and get out of the way. Either that's Stan or someone else (you can't fire an owner, but he could lose his management authority if Lerner wanted him out). Then that person hires a GM (permanent), who hires a manager, who hires coaches.

And then you'll at least know who's in charge of what, and whom to fire when firing time comes.

Nationals: Top Six Best of the Worst

Steven Biel — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 06:02:00 -0400

After yesterday's incredibly negative rant about the Nationals we despise most, I'm taking up commenter Will's challenge to rank the top five Nationals I'm enjoying most despite this lost season.

Since I'm in such a positive spirit, I'll even give you six (Sadly, Jason Bergmann didn't quite make the cut).

6. Jesus Flores

The sample size is still a bit small, but with 103 plate appearances in the book, Flores has dramatically improved his approach at the plate. Boy, did he need it. After a solid start to the season last year, he went into a prolonged skid, hitting .232, .262, and .354 after June first.

It seemed like his development might never recover from the full year he spent in the majors in 2006, after he was taken by the Nationals in the Rule-Five draft. He was then being pressed into service again in 2007 when Paul Lo Duca and Johnny Estrada both failed.

This year, his walk rate has more than doubled from 4.7 percent to 10.9 percent. His BABIP is an unsustainable .400, but with a .311, .382, and .522 line, he can have a lot of regression and still be a solid offensive catcher.

For a guy who looked totally over-matched a year ago, that's great news for Nationals fans.

5. Adam Dunn

I'm sure Big Donkey would rate higher on many people's lists, but I just personally care too much about fielding to feel all that much love for the big galoot. Still, he's got himself 16 dingers, 39 walks, and an OBP just below .400. Beats the heck out of Wily Mo Painful.

4. Jordan Zimmermann

Forget the ERA over six. He's got the league's worst defense behind him, leading to a very high .362 BABIP and low 65.4 percent strand rate. He's whiffing 9.20 per nine and walking just 2.74.

He's still getting too much of the plate with has fastball and curve and probably could stand to occasionally throw fewer strikes—making guys chase a little. Regardless, his fielding independent ERA of 4.21 tells the real story. Flash Jordan is doing just fine in his first tour through the bigs.

3. Ross Detwiler

Detwiler ranks above Zimmermann only because he's been a bigger surprise. A year ago at this time, he was walking over five batters per nine in Single-A ball. Now, he's got 15 innings under his belt with a strikeout to walk ratio of 2.40, and a fielding independent ERA of 3.63.

With his big mid-90s fastball and slow bender, the lefty is showing why he was such a high pick in the first place. He's got plenty to work on at the Triple-A level, but given where we were with this guy just a couple months ago, who could complain?

The only problem I've had is that I can't decide whether we call him Rottwiler, Rosswiler or Ross Rottweiler.

2. Nick Johnson

Nothing is more frustrating to me as a Nationals fan than listening to the legions of fans dumping on our best player because of his bad luck with injuries, as if it's somehow his fault.

His power still hasn't quite fully shown up yet and his defense hasn't been what we've come to expect. Still, he's fifth in MLB with a .436 OBP. We're so much better with him in the lineup. It's too bad the team decided that he has no future here.

Until we trade him for some fungible middle reliever, I'm going to cherish every last take.

1. Ryan Zimmerman

Who'd you expect, Wil Nieves? Zimmerman's officially taken the leap, and what a leap it is. He's raking to the tune of .319, .386, and .546, and he turns in a fielding gem almost every game. And, miracle of miracles, we resigned him long term.

(Wait, I didn't dream that, did I?)

Fans Flying North for the Nationals' Endless Winter?

Steven Biel — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 01:46:00 -0400

Distinguished Senators had a post yesterday which kicks off what I think will be an emerging narrative over the coming months and possibly years.

Will Nationals fans, many of whom for several decades migrated north to root for the Orioles, start to drift back to Birdland?

Baltimore is generating a lot of buzz these days with an exciting core of young stars led by Adam Jones, Matt Wieters and Nick Markakis, along with a rising posse of impressive pitching talent including Chris Tillman, Brian Matusz and Jake Arrieta.

Building around solid veterans like Brian Roberts and Jeremy Guthrie, it's not difficult to imagine this Orioles team emerging as a contender in the tough AL East in the next couple years.

The Orioles have essentially done what the Nationals have only talked about. They got Wieters and Arrieta by investing in the draft and paying premium bonuses for premium players who slipped because of signability. They got Jones, Tillman and a whole bunch of other useful parts by flipping declining veterans while they still had significant value. They got Koji Uehara by spending internationally.

They executed their plan.

If the Orioles do make the leap into contention, is there anything the Nationals can do, short of fielding a true contender of their own, to keep NatsTown from becoming a complete ghost town?

Would anyone, even the obsessives, really keep spending time and money on a mostly hopeless Nationals team if the Orioles are in the playoffs?

And if you assume the Nationals are at least two years away from fielding a contender, what will it do to those plans if, in the meantime, season tickets fall under 10,000?

How low could it go? We may find out.

It's a brutal downward cycle.

The Washington Nationals' Bottom Five: The Worst of the Worst

Steven Biel — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 06:53:00 -0400

This is not a post dedicated to detailed statistical analysis. This is a rant. This is my list of the absolute worst players on this miserable team that I continue to follow.

Now, I could use metrics like wins above replacement or win shares or VORP to tell us who are the worst players on this historically awful excuse for a baseball team. But no, in this post I'm following my gut to create my list, as a fan, of the players I most hate to look at in a Washington Nationals uniform.

Let the countdown begin.

5. Cristian Guzman

Yeah, yeah, he was our affirmative action all-star last year and he hits over .300. Whatever.

Three walks in 169 plate appearances is mind-blowingly dumb baseball and he brings so little power that his overall offensive production is below average at best. His fielding range has been in steep decline and he's now reached nearly Vidro-esque levels of immobility.

Even floating on a ridiculous .377 BABIP he's barely better than replacement. This is a guy who will by the end of next year have been paid $32 million by this team, more than any other player in Nationals history and 45 times more than the difference between Aaron Crow's final offer and the team's.

We gave up a draft pick to sign him back in 2004, a pick that became Brian Duensingwho's looking like another serviceable (if totally vanilla) Minnesota pitcher. Cristian Guzman stinks.

4. Dmitri Young

For the love of Pete, what on earth is that whale still doing on a major league roster? You know he's still getting $5 million a year from this team?

Even in his one affirmative action All-Star season, he gave back nearly half his value at the plate with his trained black bear-like agility at first base. Remember when we thought he was going to be the team leader who would help coach young guys like Elijah Dukes?

What a joke. Arguably the worst single example of delusional excess of the ex-Red-loving, DH-stock-piling Bowden years.

3. Julian Tavarez

If I'm keeping it to one relief pitcher only, it's Tavarez. Like most of our bullsh*tpen, he can't find the strike zone with a map, he's slow on the mound, and he gives up runs by the bushel. He's also a jerk. No beer goggles can make this guy watchable.

2. Scott Olsen

I've gone on at length about Olsen, so I'll just hit the high points. When he's not getting decked by teammates, tasered by cops, or lighting up a cigarette in the clubhouse, all he does is get rocked.

1. Anderson Hernandez

Given that we gave up next to nothing of value to get him and his near league-minimum salary, it's taken some doing for ol' AHern to earn his way into this position. He can't hit, but he bats leadoff.

He was supposed to be a good fielder, but he's constantly in brain lock (whether he's forgetting to cover second base on a steal, forgetting to cover first on a bunt, covering first but letting the throw sail past him inexplicably, failing to even attempt a throw on a critical double play, booting a lazy roller...all plays that cost the team runs).

On a team of bad news bears, Anderson Hernandez is the baddest news of them all.

Washington "Scats" Now on Pace for 118 Losses

Steven Biel — Sun, 31 May 2009 12:28:00 -0400

Our Washington Nationals now boast a .271 winning percentage and are on pace for a 44-118 record, which would be bad enough to rank them among the ten worst teams in the entire history of Major League Baseball.

Here's the current top bottom ten:

1. 1899 Cleveland Spiders: 20-134 (.130)
2. 1916 Philadelphia Athletics: 36-117 (.235)
3. 1935 Boston Braves: 38-115 (.248)
4. 1962 New York Mets: 40-120 (.250)
5. 1904 Washington Senators: 38-113 (.252)
6. 1919 Philadelphia Athletics: 36-104 .(257)
7. 1898 St. Louis Browns: 39-111 (.260)
8. 2003 Detroit Tigers: 43-119 (.265)
9. 1952 Pittsburgh Pirates: 42-112 (.273)
10. 1909 Washington Senators: 42-110 (.276)

Should the Scats lose to the Phillies again today, their winning percentage would fall to .265, good to tie the 2003 Detroit Tigers for the worst team since the '62 Mets.

Should they lose today and get swept by the Giants, that would put them exactly on pace with those expansion Mets for the worst team in three-quarters of a century.

The Worst Defensive Outfield Ever (with a Rookie Flyball Pitcher Starting)

Steven Biel — Sat, 30 May 2009 18:17:00 -0400

OK, I can't prove it, and I'm not sure how I'd even go about it, but I have to think that the Willingham-Kearns-Dunn outfield that Manny Acta is starting tonight has to be one of the worst fielding trios in history.

Let's go to the stats. We'll use UZR/150, the Mitchel Lichtman stat that tells us the number of runs above or below average that a fielder would prevent per 150 games. UZR (which stands for Ultimate Zone Rating) factors in range, throws, errors, and, for infielders, effectiveness at turning double-plays.

Here are the career UZR/150 scores for the Scats starting outfield tonight:

RF Adam Dunn: -32.5
CF Austin Kearns: -14.5
LF Josh Willingham: -5.3

That's a total of 52.3 more runs allowed than an average outfield would allow over the course of a major league season.

For context, the very best hitter in baseball last season, Albert Pujols produced 68.9 runs above average last season, based on wOBA. The next best hitter, Manny Ramirez, was 56.3 runs above average offensively. The third best hitter, Chipper Jones, was 52.2 runs above average.

That's right. The third best hitter in baseball was no more above average than this group would be below over the course of a season.

Now, I'll grant you there are some small sample sizes in play here. Kearns has appeared in center in only 60 games. Dunn has appeared in right in 101 games, and so far this year he's a mere -2.0 UZR/150 rightfielder (although last year in 23 games in Arizona he was a comic -71.4). It's possible that if you played them everyday, they'd get better. Of course, it's also possible that they'd be worse.

Besides, there's a reason the sample sizes are small for these veteran ballplayers. Very few managers are foolish enough to play Kearns and Dunn in these spots.

And this with a 22-year-old flyball pitcher on the mound. The day after Ross Detwiler was betrayed by half a dozen gift hits that would have been outs with even decently ok fielding behind him.

Seriously, if anyone wants to click around on Fangraphs.com to find a trio of outfielders who has started for any team ever with a worse combined UZR/150, let me know in the comments. I'd be curious to see.

Manny Acta and the One-Run Strategies

Steven Biel — Wed, 27 May 2009 04:39:00 -0400

One of the reasons I've tended to be a Manny Acta fan over the last few years has been his avoidance of a class of one-run strategies—plays like sac bunts, the hit-and-run, and stolen bases, which can increase the likelihood of your team scoring one run but decrease the likelihood of a big inning by giving away precious outs. Overall, one-run strategies (really these are tactics, but I digress) result in fewer runs scored and are best avoided.

There are situations where these one-run strategies are the right plays, usually very late in very close games. Also, these plays are more advantageous when your offense is weak. If your hitters have a low on-base percentage or don't hit many homers, the sacrifice is less damaging because the opportunity cost is less. And if your bullpen is a lock-down group, then taking the safer path to a one-run lead makes sense, even if you foreclose the chance of a bigger lead.

On the other hand, if your hitters get on base a lot and hit a lot of homers, the last thing you want to do is to take the bat out of their hands by giving away outs. And if your bullpen is full of arsonists, then you need to always play for the the biggest leads possible.

So given all that, why on Earth is Manny ramping up his use of one-run strategies now, just as he finally has a pretty good lineup but an historically bad bullpen?

Let's look at Sunday's game, when he sacrificed Cristian Guzman in the bottom of the seventh with runners on first and second, no outs and the Scats down one.

Here's the summary of Manny's decision from Chico's gamer:

Take, for instance, Dunn's seventh-inning, bases-loaded, game-saving bash. Two batters earlier, with men on first and second and no outs, Acta called for Cristian Guzmán to lay down a sacrifice bunt. The potential benefits made the choice seem obvious: Advance the runners, take the out and let the heart of a resurgent Nationals batting order come through.

But Acta also had to consider that he was taking the bat out of the hands of Guzmán, who entered the game batting .357, and he was opening first base, which would allow Baltimore to intentionally walk Ryan Zimmerman, who was batting .348. Plus, the Orioles could bring in a left-hander to face Dunn, a left-handed batter. Lefty pitchers typically perform better against lefty batters.

Last season, Acta said he probably would have let Guzmán swing away. These days, though, he can afford to set off such chain reactions. Guzmán moved the runners over. Zimmerman took his free pass to first. The Orioles brought in lefty Jamie Walker. And on a 2-2 slider, Dunn crushed the ball into the left-field bullpen, providing the margin for the Nationals' 8-5 victory.

"It's just a different story," Acta said. "You want to walk Zimmerman? Good, then pitch to Dunn. That's something we didn't have here in the past."

OK, so I realize that this worked out for Manny in this case. (Give me credit for not just arguing 20/20 hindsight!) But let's say Dunn strikes out here, which, for all his wonderful power, we know he's done more often than anyone in baseball over the last five years (despite Boz's erroneously calling Dunn "double-play prone," this in fact isn't the main concern—Dunn strikes out so much that he isn't that much of a GDP risk).

Now it's bases loaded and two outs, the Scats still down one. Josh Willingham due up. OK, he's hitting a healthy 110 OPS+ this year, so we still have a decent chance. We'll say he gets a base hit. Run scores, tie game.

Next up you have the horrid trio of Ronnie Belliard (OBP .221), Austin Kearns (.146/.226/.208 in his last 53 PA), and Wil Nieves, followed by the pitcher's spot. This firewall of automatic outs basically ensures that there will be no big inning. Unless Dunn comes through with an extra-base hit, the Nationals will very likely end the seventh tied or maybe up one.

By sacrificing Guzman and setting up the Zimmerman walk, Manny took a prime situation for a big inning—two men on, no outs, and the heart of his order due up to face a bad Orioles bullpen—and turned it into a make-or-break at-bat for Dunn.

Dunn came through and bailed out his manager. Good for him. Still, Manny's call was the wrong one.

And then perhaps more troubling is the fact that, as he says himself, he wouldn't have done this in past years when he had much weaker hitting teams and better bullpens (at least in 2007; 2008 was pretty bad). This is the exact opposite of what he should be doing. With more power, he should be hoarding outs and baserunners, waiting for Earl Weaver's best friend, the three-run homer.

What bums me out most about this isn't just that he's making dumb decisions now, but that he doesn't seem to understand why he was right to avoid one-run strategies in the first place. It's looking more and more like the reasons I liked Manny originally weren't really there.