The 19-day agenda
When January passed the baton to February 12 hours ago, it meant one thing to most of us who follow baseball: Pitchers and catchers report this month.
As I sit there and type those words, I'm met with a rush of optimism that rolls around this time every year. The Hot Stove thing is fun for a while, but by this point, it needs to be cleaned off and put away. There's only so many times I can write the words "believed to be" or "according to a source" before I get an urge to see real baseball again.
And we'll get that in less than three weeks, when Nationals pitchers and catchers report to Viera, Fla., on Feb. 19. But until then, there are a few more things the Nationals are looking at, and I wanted to outline them here for you. Consider it part of the cleansing process from this overly long portion of the year:
- First, the topic on everyone's mind -- and on everyone's lips at Sunday's NatsFest -- was the possibility of signing Orlando Hudson. Many players were prompted to bring it up by reporters' questions, but there wasn't one who didn't want the second baseman in a Nationals uniform. At this point in his career, Hudson may be trading on name recognition more than anything else; many believe his defense has regressed some, and his lingering wrist injury is a concern. Still, there are plenty of indications the Nationals are the most active pursuers of Hudson, to the point they may end up offering significantly more than any remaining suitor. The esteemed Joe Christensen had this to say about the possibility of the Twins signing Hudson; in his blog post, he says he can't see Minnesota spending $3 million to get the second baseman. If the Nationals make an offer in that range -- and I suspect they already have -- it could well get the job done.
- The Nationals would still like to add another veteran pitcher, but general manager Mike Rizzo sounded less than excited about what's left on the market at this point. I don't think the Nationals are inclined to overpay for a Jarrod Washburn or a Chien-Ming Wang; they got into that game last year with Daniel Cabrera, and it burned them. The point isn't whether the remaining options are better than Cabrera, who was gone by May after getting a $2.6 million deal last season; it's whether they're better than the Nationals' young pitchers by enough to command a seven-figure deal and steal developmental time from a prospect. "There's nobody I believe is out there in the pitching market that is a difference-maker, to go out and be really aggressive and go after," Rizzo said on Sunday. Don't discount the chance of Miguel Batista making a bid for a rotation spot.
- Talks about an extension for Adam Dunn are in very rudimentary stages, though Rizzo has plenty of reasons to call Dunn's agent, Greg Genske these days--he also represents Hudson. I think this deal eventually gets done, but it could happen in spring training or even the first few weeks of the season, as Ryan Zimmerman's deal did last year. The important thing to keep an eye on is if it stretches into June or July without a deal. At that point, Dunn's name will start popping up in trade rumors if the Nationals are sellers and a team like the Red Sox needs a big bat, and he'll be close enough to free agency that the impetus to get a deal done will weaken considerably. But I think there's enough interest on both sides to get something done -- maybe a three-year deal? -- before trade talk rolls around.
That's all of what's on my list to be watching between now and the reporting date. If you've got other things, as always, leave them in the comments section and we'll kick them around there.
 |
Categories (click for archive)Ben Goessling | Nationals News |
Ben,
Based on the few near-misses this winter and on whatever else you are hearing, what are the odds that Willingham is in a Nats uniform on Opening Day?
--------------------------------------
I still think they're pretty high. I don't see it being much different than it's been all winter; the Nationals aren't going to trade Willingham unless they're bowled over by something. Now, if they could get a pitcher that's ready to go, maybe they'd do it and roll the dice on Duncan in left field. But I think Willingham has enough value to the Nationals and young pitchers are hard enough to come by that if I had to guess, I'd say he's your left fielder on Opening Day.
Ben
Ben,
I think the season hinges not on getting any more starting pitchers, or finally landing Orlando Hudson or Adam Kennedy.
Elijah Dukes is the man who can make--or break--the 2010 season for washington.
If Dukes stays healthy (something he's yet to do) and stops lunging for balls out of his zone, his natural talent could push him to a .285-27-100 season with 20 steals and a .370 OBP. Then the middle of the lineup would look like this:
3B-Zimmerman: .290-35-110
1B-Dunn: .260-40-100
RF-Dukes: .285-27-100
LF-Willingham:.265-25-80
Add to that the POTENTIAL for Flores/Pudge to combine to hit .270-16-60 and that's the type of offense that can overcome inexperienced back-of-the-rotation pitchers.
But Dukes is just as likely to hit .260-15-60. The Nationals could win 73 games or they could win 82.
And I have no idea which.
Farid-
It is a sad state of affairs that I would be happy if you could guarantee that the Nats will win between 73 and 82 games. Since you can't, I might as well enjoy the spring and hope for between 82 and 87 wins.
What I am really hoping for is Orlando Hudson, even if it is irrational to have become emotionally invested in that possibility. Dukes really is a key, no doubt- he is a major-league player, but can he be a star? You have to think that he understands that he is approaching arbitration eligibility; a great year could get him enough money to dig him out of all his alimony problems. I am not being snide by saying that- I do believe this must play on his mind.
I would like to see Willingham improve on last year if we are going to keep him. I know that this would be a career year, possibly, but I already pointed out we are entering the spring.
---------------------------------------------
You're correct on Dukes, Half Street; he's currently at two years, 64 days of service time, meaning he'll hit arbitration after this season under almost any scenario. And to your point, Farid, I think Dukes can run the spectrum of possibilities this year. I wouldn't even assume he'll hit .260 if he hasn't figured out how to stay healthy or handle a curveball. But it also wouldn't surprise me if he drove in 100 runs. Remember, he was on pace to do that for a while last year. Can he continue it for a full season? If he does, and the Nats get decent production from the catcher's spot, you've got one of the more potent lineups in the league.
Ben
Can't wait to see live baseball again! (For now I'll settle for the watching the Caribbean World Series on MLB Network starting tomorrow.)
One sure sign that spring baseball is on its way, the arrival of the baseball preview magazines at the newsstands. I have a treasure trove of them in-house at the moment, to be perused as I choose (Athlon, Beckett, Lindy's, Sporting News). ahhh...
----------------------------------------------
Is the Athlon magazine out? I need to pick up a copy--I wrote the Nats preview for them (shameless plug alert).
Ben
Yes, I bought it at Giant (over the weekend, if memory serves). Thanks for the heads up on the preview. :-)
Ben
Keeping with the outfield theme, are you hearing anything about the need for a more reliable 4th OF? Someone who could start for reasonable stretches? Dukes has performance and injury concerns, Willingham has an injury past, and what if Morgan goes down again? I read that the Nats were in on Winn until the end, who would have been a fit (also, if true, implying that Rizzo has some concerns too). I am not sold on Maxwell playing long stretches.
--------------------------------------------------------
It's a fair question, especially when you have three outfielders with not-so-insignificant injury histories. I think the hope is that Chris Duncan can play chunks of time, but he's not a sure thing, either, and Maxwell has a lot to prove before anyone believes he can play every day in a pinch. Don't forget about Willie Harris. But outfield depth is definitely a concern, and one that hasn't been talked about much this winter. I could see another move to add a veteran this spring. If there's one area that shows how much the roster has changed in a year, it's this; the Nationals had more corner outfielders than they could possibly keep last spring. Not that many of them panned out, but they were commanding substantial dollars and taking up roster spots. Now, they enter the season with little competition for the starting spots, but little depth behind those three players. Thanks for bringing this up.
Ben
"As I sit there and type those words, I'm met with a rush of optimism that rolls around this time every year.'
Amen.
Ben;
Rumours flying from various sources on Sunday and yesterday that the O-Dog deal was almost done. Its now Tuesday and still waiting, what gives with this guy?
Here is a 32 y/o guy who basically lost his job at the end of last year to a back-foot swinging pine-rider and he is stringing along a team that lost 200+ games in the last 24 months. I know these guys have relentless agents and bucket loads of vanity. I'm starting to think that maybe he really hasn't been in the mix and we'll hear in August that the Nats never even talked to him. Tell me it ain't so!
---------------------------------
Hang on a second...*pops in a Fleetwood Mac album*...OK, I'm good.
I think the thing with Hudson is that he's still hoping somebody will give him more money. I think in the end he'll wind up here, but right now, there's part of me that wonders how much of this Nats stuff is a pawn for other teams to up the ante. If the Nats and say, the Rockies or Twins, were offering the same deal, I think it's less likely he winds up here. He's had a fair amount of publicity linking him to the Nationals, but money seems to be the main factor here.
The concerns about Hudson's health and his losing a job to Ronnie Belliard are legitimate, and they're key reasons why Hudson isn't getting as much interest as he feels he should. But he's still got something to offer, I think, and would give the Nationals another proven option in the middle infield. They don't have many of those right now, and we saw last season what can happen when you don't plan for worst-case scenarios.
So in the end, I think a deal with Hudson gets done, though it's clear to me money is the holdup. Does that answer your question. And I've got one for you: I can't tell from your post if you want Hudson or not. Would you like him to sign here, or would you prefer him to, um, go his own way?
Ben
Thanks Ben for the retort. I'm a Nats fan so YES I'm in the bring Hudson to DC camp. I guess its the wrangling that is driving most of us crazy as well as the alternative (Guzman and Desmond). Me and my boss were just talking and when we layed out the lineup w/O Dog batting in the two hole. You stare at the whiteboard and start thinking, damn this team is good. Plus they have a decent bench, a better then average BP and just as good top of the rotation as they had in 05 (Livan, Loiza and JPAT) vs Marquis, Lannen and Olsen/Stammen/Martin/etc,etc,.
Division, Wild card probably not but giving the Braves, Phillies and Marlins a run for thier money and stomping on the "NY Mess" would be worth the price of admission.
Ben:
Is it just me, or has this dance with Hudson been done before? I've advocated for him up to now, but at some point the team just has to move forward. He's a fair bit better than Kennedy at 2B, but when does his $$ demand just become too much for Rizzo & the FO says "Sorry, but we're out of this & going with plan B (Kennedy at 2B &/or another SP)"?
---------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, I think they did a variation of this dance with him last year. If he's drawing a line in the sand with his salary demands, I think it's much less likely he ends up here. And if you're waiting on him to lower his demands while other guys are finding homes and he's not planning to do it, you could end up missing out on a Kennedy or another starting pitcher. At some point, yes, I think you have to move on.
Ben