Part of CSNPhilly.com


« Madson avoids arbitration, signs for 1-year, $1.1M | Main | Rowand avoids arbitration, agrees to 1-year deal »

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Comments

Thanks to Chris from CP for today's rundown. Look for my 10 cent take on the Phillies' offseason in the coming days on Capitol Punishment.

Ugh. Just an awful team. There isn't a single player you would pay to see on this team. Looks like the Nationals will experience another huge drop in fan attendance this year.

Capitol Punishment, indeed. It makes me feel just a bit better about the '07 season.

I'd take Rauch and Cordero. Rauch was a horse last year (85 appearances, 3.35 ERA 1.248 WHIP, almost a K an inning). Cordero is a flat out dominator.

its now a dead heat between which is worse: team or stadium.

Looks like Marlon Byrd should of stayed in Washington. He could of received some playing time. Former Red Baron, Mike Bacsik is also signed up for the AAA-NATS. Also, Joe Thurston signed with them. He could earn some at-bats as well...

That starting rotation is bad, just bad, like what the Royals or Devil Rays throw out there.

Chris, is there any reason why the Nats seem to have no room to increase payroll? They are a brand new team, in a market that is supposed to be superior to Montreal, and they seem to have the same limitations. Are you guys just in a holding pattern until the stadium gets done.

As for the team, that should be a fairly good lineup, especially if CHurch gets the job over Logan. Bowden pulled off two absolute steals (getting Kearns and Lopez, and Vidro-Snelling), and that will be reflected in the lineup.

Does anyone know how long the Nats have Cordero under contract? I would like to trade for him but Bowden showed last year with Soriano he will hold on to a player unless he gets exactly what he wants, even if it means they lose the player to free agency for nothing.

Here comes Mr. Negativity- those Nats look like they suck on paper, but they will bug the crap outta the Phils this season. Just like the Phils seemingly make every 5+ ERA starting pitcher look like a Cy Young candidate.

Ok, enough with that pessimistic attitude.

Our rotation is far superior to Nats. Heck our rotation is pretty solid in the grand scheme of things. Need to sure up the bullpen and bench, and we're ready to go.

kdon: The team has decided to just plan for the future. They could support a payroll like last year's ~$65 million figure, but they're plowing more money into the farm system, and making some un-budgeted upgrades to the stadium. Their thinking is that since $20 million in FA pitching isn't going to make this a playoff team, they can punt '07.

Reverend: Cordero's arbitration eligible for the first time this year. He won't be a FA until after the '09 season.

Chris: Cordero is one of few players who could have a lot value in a trade. Has there been any speculation about his future?

Boston has been hot after him, but Bowden (rightly so) is asking for a lot for him. The Nats seem like they'd be willing to trade him, but they're asking for two top-level SP prospects.

It must feel like a death sentence to be a relief pitcher in Washington. The starters are terrible and Robinson beat the hell from them, especially two seasons ago. Look at what happened to Eischen. If I’m a team looking for bullpen, I’d be very cautious about the Nationals guys.

Wow, even after Vidro and Soriano leave, they are still at $65M...that is terrible! I would put the Nats at about 3 SP away from being competitive, which in this market would mean about $30M per season...ouch. You guys really picked a bad time to be short on pitchers.

Good work, BTW.

What surprises me is that the Nationals can't draw pitchers through free agency. With that park and Cordero closing, and what I thought was some money to spend, they at least should have been in on some of the second-tier guys. If Bowden is keeping his budgetary powder dry for a future f/a class, I guess that's one thing, but to some extent this seems like a self-inflicted wound.

Let's just hope that in '07, the Phils can do better than 8-11 or whatever it was last year.

djafi, I don't think they *do* have the resources, or at least don't want to spend them. I remember when Franklin was on the market, they said they only wanted to sign him to a minor league deal. Similarly, with guys like SUppan, they were only willing to go to about $7M per year, which wasn't going to get it done.

Either they are broke, greedy, or wildly off in judging the market. Either way, they should be fun to play!

Phillies agreed to a one-year, $4.35 million contract with Aaron Rowand.

On the Nats: They have been wildly off in judging the market. They thought they could resign Soriano -- gambling not to trade him last season. But the Phils seem to have trouble with the Nats so-so pitching staff. Glad we don't have to face Livan Hernandez as much in 2007 -- both for his pitching and his bat.

its now a dead heat between which is worse: team or stadium.

That's the race for second. GM wins in a landslide.

The Nationals probably figure they can continue to draw this year and maybe next year due to "newness" factor but they better field a competitive team by 2009 or they will be in tough shape.

No pitching, but even in RFK (and even w/o Soriano) they'll score runs-Church, Johnson, Kearns, and Schneider can all rake. I'll bet they DO win 75 games.

Carson is right. Last year the Phillies were 9 – 10 against the Nats. If we had beaten the crap out of them (like we should have done) we would have made the playoffs.

Dittos, Carson is right. Gnats look like crap on paper. They will lose to everyone else but will split series with Phils, just like last year. Zimmerman will kill us.

The Nationals began with a flourish but have gotten progressively worse since the middle of 2005. Irony of ironies: RFK is going to look a hell of a lot like Olympic Stadium next year. I can't remember if they have a new stadium deal in the works or not, but either way it's incredible how the fortunes of this franchise never change. I agree with the author: there's almost no chance they won't lose 100.

Are you gonna do a break down of every NL East team? It would be good to read and see the comments.
At least our bullpen is better than their rotation. They have a few good players.

RSB: although there were some financing issues, the Nats held a groundbreaking for their new stadium in May. I believe it's scheduled to open in 2008.

even though RFK is a pretty terrible place to watch baseball, the silver lining is getting ridiculously cheap lower deck seats for Phils games. now if only they would win a couple this year...

So the only thing that matters is pitching? If that's the case, the Mets might not have a winning record either-and the Phillies might win 90 games. The Nats have far too many good players to lose 100 games.

Game by game, anything can happen. I know the nats will be pretty bad this year, but don't say "they'll lose 100 games, for sure". People thought the marlins were going to be terrible last year. Look what happened.

You never can really tell until the season's over.

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories

HardballTalk

Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel

CSG