Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Off-Topic Discussion > Other Sports


Are the Nationals really that bad?

Other Sports


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-15-2009, 10:33 AM   #16
Living Legend
 
Monkeydad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: PA
Age: 35
Posts: 16,275
Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?

Lastings, the bum, was sent down to AAA.

Dukes is better anyways and should be starting over Milledge.




But yeah, they're THAT bad. Other than a core of a few players like Zimmerman, Dukes, Dunn...they're not much better than some teams' AAA teams. They have NO pitching.

They could challenge the O's 0-21 start!


The Orioles always seem to start out seasons hot, then fade after a month or two. It's still great to see Boston in the basement at 2-5!
__________________
Not sent from a Droid, iPhone, Blackberry or toaster
Monkeydad is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 04-15-2009, 10:36 AM   #17
Playmaker
 
gibbsisgod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: 129 W 81st street
Age: 35
Posts: 3,503
Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?

I see the Nats pitching situation as terminally bad. They don't really have many good young arms in the minors. By the time they build back up the farm system, all the good bats will be gone and they will be back to square one.
gibbsisgod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2009, 10:37 AM   #18
Living Legend
 
Monkeydad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: PA
Age: 35
Posts: 16,275
Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BDBohnzie View Post
Unfortunately for Wieters, a shaky pitching staff means Zaun will be around most of the year, especially if the O's stay in contention.

Considering that their top 2 pitchers are Guthrie (Career W-L record of 19-17) and 34 year old "rookie" Uehara, the O's need to beef up their pitching staff big time. Outcasts Hendrickson and Eaton make up the rest of the staff, with Alfredo Simon getting hurt last night. The bullpen should be decent, especially if Chris Ray can be the go-to guy in the 8th.

Hey, Rich Hill is coming soon...OK, never mind.

Ray looked bad in his first couple of starts but I think it was just something mechanical he had to work out. Looked great last 2 outings and he will be closing before the end of May I predict.
__________________
Not sent from a Droid, iPhone, Blackberry or toaster
Monkeydad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2009, 10:44 AM   #19
Franchise Player
 
FRPLG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Age: 35
Posts: 9,961
Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by gibbsisgod View Post
I see the Nats pitching situation as terminally bad. They don't really have many good young arms in the minors. By the time they build back up the farm system, all the good bats will be gone and they will be back to square one.
Bats can be had. Pitching has to be developed. If they ever put together a decent staff via development then they'll be fine. That's at least 4 yeard down the road. From what I can tell JB was fine at piecing together a moderately talented roster via castaways and journeymen but he didn't do much to build up the farm system pitching-wise to make any sustainable gains in productivity.

It's like they should have made him just in charge of the major league team and then hired someone else to GM the organization. Letting him put/keep his fingerprints on the whole deal was a mistake.
FRPLG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2009, 11:03 AM   #20
Playmaker
 
BDBohnzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Frederick, MD
Age: 35
Posts: 4,469
Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by gibbsisgod View Post
I see the Nats pitching situation as terminally bad. They don't really have many good young arms in the minors. By the time they build back up the farm system, all the good bats will be gone and they will be back to square one.
That's not entirely true. There is Collin Balester, Jordan Zimmermann, Garrett Mock, Ross Detwiler, Michael O'Connor among several others. The problem is rushing them to the show too quickly. The farm system actually is much better today then when Jim Bowden took over.
__________________
Bad Things man, I mean bad things...

“WE TOOK HIM IN THE SIXTH ROUND SO WE'RE NOT SMART EITHER.” - Shanny on what the Skins saw in Alfred Morris
BDBohnzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2009, 11:44 AM   #21
Franchise Player
 
ArtMonkDrillz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Age: 31
Posts: 7,997
Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BDBohnzie View Post
That's not entirely true. There is Collin Balester, Jordan Zimmermann, Garrett Mock, Ross Detwiler, Michael O'Connor among several others. The problem is rushing them to the show too quickly. The farm system actually is much better today then when Jim Bowden took over.
Plus, if they can add Strasburg they'll have some respectable young arms, which means they'd probably be able to get a decent FA reliever or closer if one becomes available.
__________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." The Dude
ArtMonkDrillz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2009, 03:23 PM   #22
Franchise Player
 
jsarno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 31 Spooner St.
Age: 39
Posts: 9,534
Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?

I just don't understand why a team with no discipline would go after a player like Dunn, who is like a windmill up there. Yes, he walks, but his strikeout numbers are awful! Get a good all around player. But none of it matters when you pitching staff is disgusting. Worthy of a AAA roster really. The Nats best starter has a 4.91 era! They also have only 2 pitchers under a 1.50 WHIP on the entire roster. Ouch. Hitting doesn't mean squat if you let up more runs than you score!
So to answer the question, yes and no. Yes, they are awful and will be in last place more than likely, but they are obviously not going to go winless so they are better than the 0-7 start suggests.
__________________
Zoltan is ZESTY! - courtesy of joeredskin
jsarno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2009, 04:22 PM   #23
Registered User
 
firstdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 50
Posts: 15,818
Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?

They came here to play a preseason game against Norfolk Tides a AAA team and lost.
firstdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2009, 04:29 PM   #24
Playmaker
 
BDBohnzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Frederick, MD
Age: 35
Posts: 4,469
Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsarno View Post
I just don't understand why a team with no discipline would go after a player like Dunn, who is like a windmill up there. Yes, he walks, but his strikeout numbers are awful! Get a good all around player. But none of it matters when you pitching staff is disgusting. Worthy of a AAA roster really. The Nats best starter has a 4.91 era! They also have only 2 pitchers under a 1.50 WHIP on the entire roster. Ouch. Hitting doesn't mean squat if you let up more runs than you score!
So to answer the question, yes and no. Yes, they are awful and will be in last place more than likely, but they are obviously not going to go winless so they are better than the 0-7 start suggests.
I'm an Adam Dunn fan. I love the fact that he's good for 40/100 every year, and if he can continue his current career clip, he'll hit 500 HRs easily. He's a decent fielder too, and once he can't run anymore, he'll still hit HRs and drive in runs as a DH in the AL. So what if he strikes out 160+ times a year...if you're going to get out, might as well go down swinging.

However, as far your question, I have 2 words for you: Jim Bowden. Considering he drafted Dunn when he was in Cincy, it's only natural that he went after him when Dunn was available.
__________________
Bad Things man, I mean bad things...

“WE TOOK HIM IN THE SIXTH ROUND SO WE'RE NOT SMART EITHER.” - Shanny on what the Skins saw in Alfred Morris
BDBohnzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2009, 04:44 PM   #25
MVP
 
dmek25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: lancaster,pa
Age: 52
Posts: 10,518
Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?

ill keep it simple. yes
__________________
"It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt."
courtesy of 53fan
dmek25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2009, 05:07 PM   #26
Franchise Player
 
jsarno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 31 Spooner St.
Age: 39
Posts: 9,534
Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BDBohnzie View Post
I'm an Adam Dunn fan. I love the fact that he's good for 40/100 every year, and if he can continue his current career clip, he'll hit 500 HRs easily. He's a decent fielder too, and once he can't run anymore, he'll still hit HRs and drive in runs as a DH in the AL. So what if he strikes out 160+ times a year...if you're going to get out, might as well go down swinging.

However, as far your question, I have 2 words for you: Jim Bowden. Considering he drafted Dunn when he was in Cincy, it's only natural that he went after him when Dunn was available.
I like Adam Dunn as well, what I am saying is, he's not a good fit for Washington, and he's not a decent fielder (explain in a moment). He's a career .247 hitter, and man can he bash the ball! But what Washington needs to do is manufacture runs. Play small ball once in a while, and Dunn isn't the type. He only has 21 sacrifice flies in his CAREER! Only 2 sacrifice hits in his career. You say "might as well go down swinging", I think that logic is why teams lose. Walk so someone else can get you home (something Dunn is top notch at) or put the ball in play so there is a CHANCE at a run somewhere. Dunn doesn't do that. He has average speed at best.
About his fielding. The league average during his career for an outfielder is .984% fielding percentage, his is a miserable .969%. 1st base the league average throughout his career is .993%, his is .985%. He is below average at both positions. With his power and his great health, he should average 120+ rbi a season. He's an all or nothing kind of guy. Don't get me wrong, this works for some teams, and he is valuable to some teams. But he can't relied upon to be the backbone of a lineup. He's one of those guys who would be a great compliment to a super star. If he could get his average up to .280, his OBP would soar over .400 (.420 range) and his RBI totals would reach amazing heights. He has been top 5 in strikeouts 5 years running, and #1 3 of those 5. That's not a flattering stat.
__________________
Zoltan is ZESTY! - courtesy of joeredskin
jsarno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2009, 05:57 PM   #27
Franchise Player
 
jsarno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 31 Spooner St.
Age: 39
Posts: 9,534
Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?

Kind of surprised no one has called for Manny Acta's head.
__________________
Zoltan is ZESTY! - courtesy of joeredskin
jsarno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 10:34 AM   #28
Playmaker
 
BDBohnzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Frederick, MD
Age: 35
Posts: 4,469
Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsarno View Post
Play small ball once in a while...
Every team needs that slugger, the one who's going to hit HRs and drive in runs. The Nats have plenty of guys who can play small ball when needed (Guzman, Johnson, Dukes, Belliard, Harris) and the guys that will drive in runs (Dunn, Zimmerman, Willingham, Kerns). Their depth actually allows them to change the lineup to fit their needs as well.

Needless to say, the problem in the past has been lack of power. Last year, Milledge and Zimmerman led the team in HRs with 14, with Milledge leading the team with 61 RBIs. Dunn steps in as their bonafide cleanup hitter, something the Nats haven't seen since their playing days in Montreal.

And I think the fans know that Acta isn't the problem, that their pitching is atrocious...Acta also has Kasten's backing, so he'll get the benefit of the doubt.
__________________
Bad Things man, I mean bad things...

“WE TOOK HIM IN THE SIXTH ROUND SO WE'RE NOT SMART EITHER.” - Shanny on what the Skins saw in Alfred Morris
BDBohnzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 11:25 AM   #29
Living Legend
 
Monkeydad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: PA
Age: 35
Posts: 16,275
Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsarno View Post
Kind of surprised no one has called for Manny Acta's head.
I'm surprised he hasn't been inserted into a game. He looks young enough to play and can't really be worse than some of their players.
__________________
Not sent from a Droid, iPhone, Blackberry or toaster
Monkeydad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2009, 03:18 PM   #30
Franchise Player
 
jsarno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 31 Spooner St.
Age: 39
Posts: 9,534
Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BDBohnzie View Post
Every team needs that slugger, the one who's going to hit HRs and drive in runs. The Nats have plenty of guys who can play small ball when needed (Guzman, Johnson, Dukes, Belliard, Harris) and the guys that will drive in runs (Dunn, Zimmerman, Willingham, Kerns). Their depth actually allows them to change the lineup to fit their needs as well.

Needless to say, the problem in the past has been lack of power. Last year, Milledge and Zimmerman led the team in HRs with 14, with Milledge leading the team with 61 RBIs. Dunn steps in as their bonafide cleanup hitter, something the Nats haven't seen since their playing days in Montreal.

And I think the fans know that Acta isn't the problem, that their pitching is atrocious...Acta also has Kasten's backing, so he'll get the benefit of the doubt.
I can't really argue with that...you are certainly right about the Nats needing a power hitter. My point was lack of discipline which Dunn doesn't help. Also that pitching is a priority, not hitting, but I guess you have to start somewhere huh? It's not like they have the money to really spend when they ranked 13th out of 16 NL teams for attendance at barely over 2.3 mil. So I get your point.
Just an FYI, and I know he was just a "rental", but Soriano hit 46 homers for you in 2006. I'm surprised that was forgotten given that he joined the 40/40 club that year. (4th player ever I believe...Canseco, Bonds, A-Rod, Soriano)

On a side note, how much more losing do you think Acta can endure and still remain with the team?
__________________
Zoltan is ZESTY! - courtesy of joeredskin
jsarno is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.31151 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25