Warpath

Warpath (http://www.thewarpath.net/forum.php)
-   Other Sports (http://www.thewarpath.net/forumdisplay.php?f=60)
-   -   Are the Nationals really that bad? (http://www.thewarpath.net/showthread.php?t=29299)

gibbsisgod 04-14-2009 07:06 AM

Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
I am not a huge baseball fan but I do watch occasionally. I have caught a few Nats games so far this season and they look horrible.

They have the worst feilding % in baseball, The worst opponent on base % and the second worst ERA. They're not doing too bad at the plate but they leave way to many runners in scoring position. They are the only team not to win a game and I don't see that changing any time soon.

The announcers were making comments like "sometimes the bounces just don't go our way", and "over time these things even out".

Is it just some unlucky bounces or are they really that bad?

And if they are really that bad, how long do you think it will be until they can become consistent winners?

GTripp0012 04-14-2009 07:08 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
The 0-7 start is a bit of a fluke, as they (on paper) have the best team they've had since they've been the Nats. However, while they should be good for 70-72 wins, their pitching and defense is every bit is bad as it looks. They'll come around on offense though.

ArtMonkDrillz 04-14-2009 08:05 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
I was at the game yesterday and their pitching/defense is completely laughable. I seriously think that the team is holding out hope that Nick Johnson gets injured so that they can move Dunn to 1st and Willingham to left. They also need to get rid of Lastings Milledge because that kid just pure sucks. Oh, and my 12 year old sister can field a grounder better than the guy they had at 2nd yesterday.

And by the way, I'm a pretty big Nats fan.

gibbsisgod 04-14-2009 08:16 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=ArtMonkDrillz;545521]I was at the game yesterday and their pitching/defense is completely laughable. I seriously think that the team is holding out hope that Nick Johnson gets injured so that they can move Dunn to 1st and Willingham to left. They also need to get rid of Lastings Milledge because that kid just pure sucks. Oh, and my 12 year old sister can field a grounder better than the guy they had at 2nd yesterday.

And by the way, I'm a pretty big Nats fan.[/quote]I only saw Milledge's last AB in the 9th. He was swinging widly at anything close to the plate. He has no plate dicipline whatsoever. And as for NJ, Its only a matter of time.

I do feel bad for Guzman though, He had one hell of a game yesterday only to come up lame running out a single (should have been a double) in the 9th.

FRPLG 04-14-2009 08:29 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
Ladies and Gentlemen your 2009 Jim Bowden Nationals.

redsk1 04-14-2009 10:37 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
Jim Bowden is horrible and it's good that he's gone. I'm a huge Braves fan, but i'll pull for the Nat's on other occasions.

The Nat's pitching is horrible. They've got alot of guys that no one else wants. They actually have some offensive talent though. Guzman, Dunn, Johnson and Dukes has some potential. The rest of the lineup is not good though. They need to stockpile some talented arms any way possible. They are going to get the #1 pick this year and try to sign this kid from SD State (i believe) that can throw 100mps +. That's a start.

The problem is they have a new stadium and are trying to draw in a bad economy w/ a bad team. They need to do some serious trading at the trade deadline for some minor league talent. The Nat's fans are just going to have to wait 3 years for a decent team.

#1 pick & Jordan Zimmerman are some glimmers of hope.

ArtMonkDrillz 04-14-2009 04:04 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/nationalsjournal/2009/04/milledge_optioned_to_class_aaa.html?wprss=nationalsjournal]Nationals Journal - Milledge Optioned To Class AAA Syracuse[/url]

Lastings is headed back to the Minors. Maybe this can give the team a little spark. It'd be nice to get Willingham and Kerns into the lineup to see if they can add a little more power.

BDBohnzie 04-14-2009 10:05 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
It also doesn't help that the O's are playing well to start...

The Nats certainly have the firepower to keep them in games, but their pitching is atrocious. They need their young arms to develop quickly. The Nats started slow on defense last year I believe...it's early. Hopefully with Bowden out of the picture, Kasten and Mike Rizzo fix all the problems and right the ship so to speak.

KLHJ2 04-14-2009 10:08 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=BDBohnzie;545891]It also doesn't help that the O's are playing well to start...

The Nats certainly have the firepower to keep them in games, but their pitching is atrocious. They need their young arms to develop quickly. The Nats started slow on defense last year I believe...it's early. Hopefully with Bowden out of the picture, Kasten and Mike Rizzo fix all the problems and right the ship so to speak.[/quote]

How well are the O's doing? I'm too lazy to look.

GMScud 04-14-2009 10:13 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=Angry;545893]How well are the O's doing? I'm too lazy to look.[/quote]

I'm a HUGE O's fan. They're 5-2, and tied 3-3 in the 7th inning right now with Texas. Offensively we're very solid. I love the top half of our lineup. And it will get better when Matt Weiters gets called up to replace Zaun in a few months.

The O's big problem this year will be starting rotation for sure. We're definitely an up and coming team.

I love all things DC, but I sure am glad I'm not a big Nats fan. They are woeful.

KLHJ2 04-14-2009 10:22 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=GMScud;545895]I'm a HUGE O's fan. They're 5-2, and tied 3-3 in the 7th inning right now with Texas. Offensively we're very solid. I love the top half of our lineup. And it will get better when Matt Weiters gets called up to replace Zaun in a few months.

The O's big problem this year will be starting rotation for sure. We're definitely an up and coming team.

I love all things DC, but I sure am glad I'm not a big Nats fan. They are woeful.[/quote]

SWEET! I am an O's fan as well, but I stopped following baseball when Cal retired. My wife got me some Nat's player's autograph. I am looking at it now. Who's initials are "TR"?

ArtMonkDrillz 04-14-2009 10:25 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=Angry;545898]SWEET! I am an O's fan as well, but I stopped following baseball when Cal retired. My wife got me some Nat's player's autograph. I am looking at it now. Who's initials are "TR"?[/quote]Tim Redding maybe? He's not in DC anymore but he was the best pitcher on the team last year.

KLHJ2 04-14-2009 10:28 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=ArtMonkDrillz;545901]Tim Redding maybe? He's not in DC anymore but he was the best pitcher on the team last year.[/quote]

That's gotta be it. There are two recognizable d's and a g at the end.

GMScud 04-14-2009 11:02 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=Angry;545898]SWEET! I am an O's fan as well, but I stopped following baseball when Cal retired. My wife got me some Nat's player's autograph. I am looking at it now. Who's initials are "TR"?[/quote]

I absolutely love baseball. It was always my favorite sport growing up (with football a close second of course), but I was just a lousy hitter, so my playing days didn't last past my freshman year of high school (come to find out I needed glasses/contacts pretty badly).

It's been pretty miserable being an Orioles fan for the past decade or so, but now that Peter Angelos has finally let someone else call the shots (Andy MacPhail), things are looking up in Baltimore. I cheer for the Nats to do well, but even though they are my hometown's team, I can't just jump ship on my Birds.

BDBohnzie 04-15-2009 10:29 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=GMScud;545895]I'm a HUGE O's fan. They're 5-2, and tied 3-3 in the 7th inning right now with Texas. Offensively we're very solid. I love the top half of our lineup. And it will get better when Matt Weiters gets called up to replace Zaun in a few months.

The O's big problem this year will be starting rotation for sure. We're definitely an up and coming team...

I absolutely love baseball. It was always my favorite sport growing up (with football a close second of course), but I was just a lousy hitter, so my playing days didn't last past my freshman year of high school (come to find out I needed glasses/contacts pretty badly).[/quote]
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.

I played baseball into my junior year in high school, when being big and slow finally caught up to me. I was a decent pitcher (no starts in HS, but got a few saves), but the thing that kept me around longer than I should have been was being a catcher. If you have kids who love playing baseball, and want to stick with it longer than little league, tell them to get behind the plate. Especially if they have a good arm...

Monkeydad 04-15-2009 10:33 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
Lastings, the bum, was sent down to AAA. :D

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! :) :) :)

gibbsisgod 04-15-2009 10:36 AM

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.

Monkeydad 04-15-2009 10:37 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=BDBohnzie;545983]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.
[/quote]


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

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.

FRPLG 04-15-2009 10:44 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=gibbsisgod;545990]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.[/quote]

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.

BDBohnzie 04-15-2009 11:03 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=gibbsisgod;545990]I see the Nats pitching situation as terminally bad. [B]They don't really have many good young arms in the minors.[/B] 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.[/quote]
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.

ArtMonkDrillz 04-15-2009 11:44 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=BDBohnzie;546002]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.[/quote]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.

jsarno 04-15-2009 03:23 PM

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.

firstdown 04-15-2009 04:22 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
They came here to play a preseason game against Norfolk Tides a AAA team and lost.

BDBohnzie 04-15-2009 04:29 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=jsarno;546072][B]I just don't understand why a team with no discipline would go after a player like Dunn[/B], 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.[/quote]
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.

dmek25 04-15-2009 04:44 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
ill keep it simple. yes

jsarno 04-15-2009 05:07 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=BDBohnzie;546104]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.[/quote]

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.

jsarno 04-15-2009 05:57 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
Kind of surprised no one has called for Manny Acta's head.

BDBohnzie 04-16-2009 10:34 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=jsarno;546116]Play small ball once in a while...[/quote]
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.

Monkeydad 04-16-2009 11:25 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=jsarno;546126]Kind of surprised no one has called for Manny Acta's head.[/quote]

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.

jsarno 04-16-2009 03:18 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=BDBohnzie;546289]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.

[b]Needless to say, the problem in the past has been lack of power.[/b] 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.[/quote]

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?

ArtMonkDrillz 04-16-2009 03:28 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
The think the other HUGE reason for bringing Dunn in was to, at the very least, give the fans the impression that the team is willing to spend some money to bring in a big name/someone to add a little excitement to the lineup. Adam Dunn isn't a superstar but at least he's someone with a big bat and a great personality, which is something this team has been lacking since Soriano (God I was a big fan of his and still wish he could have stayed!).

jsarno 04-16-2009 03:35 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=ArtMonkDrillz;546491]The think the other HUGE reason for bringing Dunn in was to, at the very least, give the fans the impression that the team is willing to spend some money to bring in a big name/someone to add a little excitement to the lineup. Adam Dunn isn't a superstar but at least he's someone with a big bat and a great personality, which is something this team has been lacking since Soriano (God I was a big fan of his and still wish he could have stayed!).[/quote]

Great point.

ArtMonkDrillz 04-16-2009 09:49 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
Nats Win! Nats Win! Nats Win!

[IMG]http://farm1.static.flickr.com/31/51999805_b811fe653d.jpg[/IMG]

70Chip 04-16-2009 10:35 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=ArtMonkDrillz;546605]Nats Win! Nats Win! Nats Win!

[IMG]http://farm1.static.flickr.com/31/51999805_b811fe653d.jpg[/IMG][/quote]

How bout that!

gibbsisgod 04-17-2009 06:01 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
How about the bullpen pitching 2 1/3 scoreless, hitless, and walkless innings? Pretty impressive stuff.

Monkeydad 04-17-2009 11:41 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
Wow...didn't think they'd win at all in April!

jsarno 04-17-2009 02:42 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=Buster;546771]Wow...didn't think they'd win at all in April![/quote]

OUCH! Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while...going the whole month of April without a win should have meant the entire team being sent down to the minors...that would be a travesty!

BDBohnzie 04-17-2009 04:56 PM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[quote=jsarno;546478]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?[/quote]
Dunn has 808 career walks in 8 seasons, so while he's not the model of discipline, I wouldn't say he has a lack of discipline either. We're not talking Rob Deer...

The Nats have several young arms on the farm that they are waiting to bring up, which is why I think they went after hitting as opposed to pitching. They have 2 or 3 guys at AAA that are almost ready to rock and roll.

As far as Soriano goes, I didn't mention him because I don't consider him a true cleanup hitter. He has too much speed and would be more important in other spots in the lineup. In fact, he spent most of that 2006 season hitting first or third for the Nats.

I think Acta has a long leash until the Front Office starts spending more money. I think Kasten realizes that it's going to take some time. But once he thinks all the pieces are in place, that leash will shorten considerably.

gibbsisgod 04-20-2009 08:20 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
With only 1 win so far the Nats don't deserve another thread so I'm burying this here.

[url=http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/9417452/Nationals,-3B-Zimmerman-agree-to-new-contract]FOX Sports on MSN - MLB - Nationals, 3B Zimmerman agree to new contract[/url]

Seems like a pretty reasonable contract to me.

Monkeydad 04-20-2009 11:44 AM

Re: Are the Nationals really that bad?
 
[url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/nationalsjournal/2009/04/dukes_scratched_for_violating.html?wprss=nationalsjournal]Nationals Journal - Dukes Scratched For Violating Team Rule[/url]

I heard on ESPN this morning that Dukes was 5 minutes late for a meeting because he was doing some event/signings for some Little Leaguers. The team benched him (their hottest hitter now) and threatened to send him to AAA if it happens again.

:D


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:45 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.

Page generated in 0.91715 seconds with 8 queries