Is Rizzo willing to part with top prospects to bring trades across finish line?

NASHVILLE - By now, most observers expected the Nationals to have gotten a lot futher in their bullpen makeover, perhaps swinging a trade for an eighth- or ninth-inning arm. But here we are, entering the second day of the Winter Meetings at the Gaylord Opryland Resort & Convention Center, and the Nats have done nothing of significance.

What's more, the once-promising plethora of shutdown relief arms has thinned out considerably in the past two days. Darren O'Day is apparently returning to the Orioles, lured by a fourth year the Nats probably weren't offering. Aroldis Chapman had been traded to the Dodgers before some troubling domestic abuse reports surfaced late last night, ruining the umpteenth attempt Rizzo has made to acquire the flamethrowing Cuban; now it's doubtful he'll be moving on from Cincinnati. Joakim Soria is gone - well, returning, actually - to the Royals.

If we're assuming that Plan A has been blown up, what letter of the alphabet have we now reached?

The Nationals will reportedly sign free agent righty Shawn Kelley, who could be a useful bullpen piece, but is far from the lockdown arm the Nationals were seeking.

No one, least of all the braintrust in the Nationals suite at this massive expanse of holiday lights and well-appointed hotel rooms, is happy about those developments. Nor are the fans, who were expecting the arrival of new, top-flight relievers that would allow the Nats to deal off deposed closer Drew Storen and hasten the departure of Jonathan Papelbon, even if Rizzo has to eat all or most of the $11 million Papelbon will earn in 2016.

But what if the price for Chapman was, say, stud pitching prospect Lucas Giolito? And what if the retooling Reds wanted another top arm in the system like Erick Fedde thrown into the deal?

Do you mortgage the future for the present? Does the fact that Chapman will enter free agency after 2016 weigh into your opinion? How much do you want to pay for a one-year rental?

There's little doubt Rizzo wants to trade Storen, dump Papelbon and proceed with his relief reconstruction. But being a savvy GM, he's not into the immediate gratification aspect of wheeling and dealing. And he would be selling the Nationals short if he were.

Remember how depleted the prospect watchers said the Nationals farm system was after Rizzo sent four top farmhands to the A's for Gio Gonzalez in December 2011? Remember how the Nats have focused on restocking their minor league cupboard over the past couple of years, so they'd have ready replacements (Trea Turner) for departing free agents (Ian Desmond) and sufficient depth if they needed to add a piece without raiding their major league roster?

So does Rizzo, who says he's ready to part with some of the youth he's been hoarding if that's what it takes to push a deal across the finish line.

"We feel good about our minor league system," Rizzo said yesterday in his daily media briefing. "We feel we have a deep prospect list and there's a lot of teams that are interested in our prospects. The possibility is there if we so desire to go out and make a trade for a veteran player with our prospects. It's always a possibility. We balance that with what's the best way to construct the 25-man roster, and in that's the best way, we've shown it in the past. But we feel really fortunate that we have such a deep system with such quality prospects that team covet."

OK, for those of you unfamiliar with Rizzo-speak, let me translate.

The Nationals aren't trading Giolito, not after they drafted him, rehabbed him from Tommy John surgery and developed him to the point that he's finally ready to help out on the major league level, perhaps as soon as mid-season.

They really don't want to part with Turner, who will be playing full-time in Washington by mid-season. Center fielder Victor Robles, Fedde, right-hander Reynaldo Lopez, infielder Wilmer Difo - they represent the future, even if they could be used to fill a present need.

Like most GMs, Rizzo has an affinity for the guys he drafts and develops. But he cannot become too attached - if he does, he risks not being able to see the forest through the trees. When he sounds like he's too attached - and every general manager does at some point - it's the former scout in him coming out. It happens, but in the good GMs, it's only a momentary flaw.

If Rizzo thinks he needs to part with some of the guys he's populated the system with, even the players that fans have grown accustomed to salivating over and anticipating good things from, he'll do it. In a heartbeat. Not because he wants to, but because he has to. It's part of his job description, keeping one eye on what's happening now and the other on what could come to pass, and thinking about what happens when the two intersect.