Nattitude
- Thread starter rb nova
- Start date
Let me get this straight. So, someone will overpay for Desmond. Someone else for Strasburg. Someone else for J. Zimmerman. Laroche is already gone. As are Soriano and clipboard. The Yankees for Harper. Good chance all of these guys leave without winning anything. Yet, you'll be happy becUse the Nats didn't overpay forvanybof them. Cool philosophy.
Nats have a nice window for sustained runs. baseball is goofy. Key is to get in and hope to get hot. That's what happens pretty much every year. See San FRan and KC last year. Nats are loaded with arms, have Rendon, Harper and Zimmerman hitting 3-5 the next 4-5 years. You just build around those guys. Rizzo has the organization constructed so well. You CoPers don't understand this as you've never seen it done. They have owners with deep pockets. They'll still spend but they won't spend on guys on the backend...like say Ryan Howard.
I hope they resign Fister and Span. Those are the two guys we'll miss. They won't resign Span because Taylor needs to play everyday. You can't pay Span 4 for 50. Someone will as he's really good. Zimmermann is too many years removed from Tommy John. Nats believe you only get 8 years from those so I don't expect him back. No worries Giolito just steps in and you also have to get Roark into the rotation. Why I'm not sure Fister returns. I hope they can resign him. No way on any planet I'd pay Desmond. I love him but paying would be crazy. His defense isn't good enough and he makes too many empty outs/too undisciplined a hitter. Someone will pay him loads of money because he's 20/20 at the SS position. Lock Rendon up long-terms by buying out 2-3 FA years and Nats are ready to roll for a long time. They'll still spend, just not on some of these guys you like to remind everyone hasn't won a thing. They are a very smart organization. You let Desmond walk even if he hits .400 and is the World Series MVP. Don't pay for past production. It ends poorly.
Again, they don't give out trophies and rings for the best constructed team. You actually have to win something.
Like maybe a WS title. Or a pennant. Or a division title. Or a playoff series. Anything.
What I understand is that you appreciate the "right" baseball move 100% of the time. I get that, though. Until they win one playoff series you have nothing else to hang your hat on.
And for the record the spending of money really isn't the problem here. A couple of other things were more of an issue. Specifically the farm system in that they traded some pieces when trying to win, didn't have high picks in other years, and just general poor scouting. Fortunately, some of that seems to be getting righted..
Again, about 80% of teams have a nice run through a given stretch. Then, 10% continually suck and the other 10% sustain success longer than the norm. The Cardinals aren't the norm.
And for the record the spending of money really isn't the problem here. A couple of other things were more of an issue. Specifically the farm system in that they traded some pieces when trying to win, didn't have high picks in other years, and just general poor scouting. Fortunately, some of that seems to be getting righted..
Again, about 80% of teams have a nice run through a given stretch. Then, 10% continually suck and the other 10% sustain success longer than the norm. The Cardinals aren't the norm.
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
Burrs, I don't play for the Nats. Their playoff failures are not mine. Obviously you haven't seen my great hair, plenty to hang my hat on. As for the Nats, I'm season ticket holder, not a player.
Lay
Scherzer is signed until he is 37, and if they resign Fister, hes going to get a deal that will at least be through his age 36 season. Contracts like that don't help anyone.
What's new is old -- "goofy" is the new "crap shoot" I guess. I still tend to think some teams are just better in the postseason than others, due to how the team is constructed (and to an extent, how managed). So if I'm a DC fan I have trouble praising Rizzo to the heavens based on how he's done it, when the team has fallen way short of expectations three years running in the postseason (or lack thereof). I don't get how regular season and postseason success is unrelated.
Strasburg is a good example. He's a pu$$y when it comes to the postseason. He willingly sat out their first time. Was not great last couple years, bad at times in his starts.
When a team is good, not a crap shoot. No coincidence, goofiness or crap shoot that 2008-2009 Phils mashed each team they saw on the way to two straight WS.
We already have the bet on this in Desmond's case but maybe Nats overvalue some of their talent. E.g., so what if Desmond is 20/20 at his position, if it's not his real position? He's not competent at short. Teams constructed to go deep in the postseason, for instance, probably would not have him there.
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
Levels of discourse on benchwarmers:
1. Knuckle Dragging CoPer: Joe Vance, Burrs, Gdog
characteristics: lack of wit and tact, CoP centric, delusions of intelligence
2. Old Fuddy Duddy: whitecat, uncleBill57, Mainliner II, tjc
characteristics: non-linear, trouble following complex ideas, campy humor
3. Savant: spg76ers
characteristics: can't clearly explain the magic going on in his head
4. Everyone else
This is an interesting idea for a new thread.
As an aside, JoeVance is clinically insane.