Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

2015 Washington Nationals Thread - Hot Stove News: Daniel Murphy signed, Phillips is an idiot.

Riggo#44

By Riggo#44
in The Tailgate

Recommended Posts

RemoveSnyder

RemoveSnyder

Posted
Posted

Bruce is average to bad. CarGo is expensive, injury prone, and has questionable away splits. Brantley is unrealistic.

 

Gonzo's 2012 and 2013 is not something you turn your nose up to, if you "bat crowd" guys want to improve the overall bats. He's not that far removed. Not as hot as his 2010 season and maybe not like the '11 season, but definitely a lively bat. Dude knows how to swing, a sweet looking stroke. I don't think it has disappeared.

 

His injury stuff just lessens the collateral expense, which is another point you keep bringing up about Brant. Surely you see why a less than pristine commodity was included for discussion, especially when the one riding high on career bests can capitalize upon the moment at hand.

 

A CarGo get seems like the kind-of move the Patriots would make. Get a former stud slightly removed from top of the league status, a little bit worn, plug and get the most out of him for a championship run. 

 

Eh, money, money, money. The window is now, man. Spend, there's no ****ing cap. Go for the championship. 

 

You would have taken 2012 Bruce though, warts and all, with the kind-of clean-up pop he was dealing. The guy generated a lot of runs and scored a lot of runs. 2011 / 2012 Bruce replicates Morse's production despite the drop in OBP and AVG. Besides, 2011 Morse is a complete outlier for the career, you know right?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slateman

Slateman

Posted
Posted

There is a luxury tax. The Lerners so not want to exceed it.

CarGo is NEVER healthy. He's owed 53 million over the next three years. His numbers away from Coors are not nearly as good as his numbers at Coors and his numbers at Nats Park are even worse. He's not a move the Patriots make. The Patriots would have him on a one year, prove it deal, not providing salary relief. Trading for CarGo is the kind of move that could cost this team re-signing Strasburg, Harper, Rendon, or Ramos.

2011/2012 Bruce is gone and he hasn't been back. Morse's 2011 is outlier, however he still OPS' d .794 in 2012 and .811 in 2014. Morse can straight mash when he's healthy. Bruce is all power and a ton of strikeouts. Again, this team's problem wasn't a lack of power nor scoring runs. It was situational hitting. Bruce doesn't fix that.

The window is not now. That was the whole reason for trading for Turner and Escobar amd signing Scherzer. The window is going to be open for a while, particularly with four first round draft picks in next year's draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RemoveSnyder

RemoveSnyder

Posted
Posted

There is a luxury tax. The Lerners so not want to exceed it.

CarGo is NEVER healthy. He's owed 53 million over the next three years. His numbers away from Coors are not nearly as good as his numbers at Coors and his numbers at Nats Park are even worse. He's not a move the Patriots make. The Patriots would have him on a one year, prove it deal, not providing salary relief. Trading for CarGo is the kind of move that could cost this team re-signing Strasburg, Harper, Rendon, or Ramos.

2011/2012 Bruce is gone and he hasn't been back. Morse's 2011 is outlier, however he still OPS' d .794 in 2012 and .811 in 2014. Morse can straight mash when he's healthy. Bruce is all power and a ton of strikeouts. Again, this team's problem wasn't a lack of power nor scoring runs. It was situational hitting. Bruce doesn't fix that.

The window is not now. That was the whole reason for trading for Turner and Escobar amd signing Scherzer. The window is going to be open for a while, particularly with four first round draft picks in next year's draft.

 

 

I guess there's no such thing as restructuring a contract in baseball, huh?  :)

You can avoid the luxury tax. Apparently set at 189 million for 2015. Are we anywhere near that?  :)

 

Quick search, I found we're around 155 million, committed, right now. Plenty of room there, Haus. 

 

Yeah, I know, and Randy Moss was a malcontent and Darrelle Revis was never a lockdown corner. If you can find a way to get a salary more inline with the inherent games missed, projected by the average, per the health concerns, then this whole idea of overpaying for trash, poofs up in smoke. 

 

Simply, I'm sure Riz could wiggle something on a restructure.

 

It was Rizzo who scouted and brought Cargo to Arizona back in 2002, when Riz was the Director of Scouting. It was also Riz who was the lone GM to inquire about Cargo back in the summer of 2012, for trade. Never materialized. 

 

To think that Rizzo hasn't at least entertained the idea, is just silly. Yeah, the prudent move is to be frugal. Riz may be steadfast and never go past a certain dollar figure, ultimately. Thus, he won't overextend to reach, even if it was to get someone he likes. Just because a move doesn't materialize doesn't mean it wasn't sought after. And yet, the basis of the idea still remains.

 

Likewise, if you don't think Belichick actively engages in fanciful trade ideas, you're off too. He does. It's been spoken about for years from that former cleveland and oakland executive, who worked with him, and was quoted as saying that Belichick would call him up at all hours of the day with ideas for trade. Ideas on how to improve the team, move people.

 

It's just that he doesn't act impulsively on every first thought. Nor does he overpay, ultimately, when all is said and done. And yes, they almost always get guys for value. But he certainly sits around and tries to pry former premier types away. He's even willing to ship away decent guys on his team in order to facilitate a trade. Albeit using some uber frugal mindset. The basis of the idea, however, is still there.

 

 

So now I don't know anything about baseball or football talent acquisition. Nice.

I'm all fine for getting a 26 year old Matt Holliday clone, do you know where that guy is?

 

Next subject:

So you're using OPS? What was your point again?

Ok, Bruce's 2012 OPS exceeds Morse's 2012 OPS, (.841 versus .791). Bruce had four consecutive years (2010 - 2013) of OPS above .800.

And the point you wanted to make was what?

 

The best Morse could string together, in consecutive years above .800, was with us in 2010 and 2011. Then you totally skipped over Morse's 2013 OPS which dropped significantly to the mid .600s. Ha.

Why didn't you mention that?

And Bruce's 2013 OPS was still in the .800s. No mention of that.

 

Then you skip right to Morse's bounce back OPS stat for 2014, at .811. Ok.

Well, Bruce had his off year in 2014, like Morse did in 2013. Seriously, you're trying to make a distinction between Bruce at .807 OPS (2013) and Morse at .811 OPS (2014)? 

 

Morse career average .808 // Bruce career average .790. 

Cool. 

Again, this team's problem wasn't a lack of power nor scoring runs. It was situational hitting.

 

This needs its own space. If situational hitting doesn't lead to more runs scored, then what they hell good is situational hitting? Maybe you should expand upon that. Because, to have good situational hitting inevitably means that someone is advancing runners and those runners safely cross home plate.

 

Here's you're problem with interpreting what I'm saying, you think all I want is some big guy to step up to the plate and go all Gas House Gorillas. No. That's not it. I'm fine with a little slap ball.

 

How ever you want to define that term, how ever you want to make that a metric, go for it.

 

But ultimately, if situational hitting doesn't equate to keeping the conga line moving, to actually producing more runs than the opponent, then your situational hitting metric is nothing I want to have.

 

Not being able to bring in runners in scoring position is clear as day for us. So what's new? 

 

The situational hitting I want is when we have someone on 2nd base, the batter at the plate safely hits a double. Maybe you don't see the 'hypocrisy' of saying we're fine scoring runs but we need to improve situational hitting. Of course we do ... the kind of run scoring that matters is always situational. I don't care about scoring 9 runs, in the 3rd inning, on the Mets, in March. I want 4 runs, against the Giants, in October, in the 8th inning.

 

I mean, again, like with Holliday, how do we get a 26 yr.old clone of Morneau & his .320+ RISP average? 

Brantley, incidentally, was .376 with RISP in 2014.

You seem to think I'm incapable of understanding a basic principle of baseball. 

 

 

Next subject:

I don't follow your logic here: signing Scherzer, at age 30, is so that we are competitive in 4 years time?

Uh, I think I disagree.

 

The window is what, four, five, years from now? 

 

I don't know what exactly your point was lumping Turner in there with Escobar and Scherzer. Giving up youth in Souza for youth in Turner, is ... IDK, simply shuffling of the deck, which happens all of the time. I don't think there's anything special to divine from that one move in of itself.

 

So we have four 1st round selections, presume you're talking about 2016. And at best you have to give them at least 2 years time to ascend to the Majors. More like 3 years as a general conservative estimate. So, starting with 2016 and counting, we should be in the World Series by 2018. So, Scherzer will be 34 in July of 2018. Nice, well, looks like I can check out for the next four years or so, according to your timetable. 

 

And I haven't said anything about Escobar, but again, at age 32 ... his arrival is about the now, the present year, not the future, not 3 or 4 years from now. Or am I misreading what you wrote? Because it sure reads like you said Scherzer at 30 and Escobar at 32 was all about a window that is open for the next 6 years. 

 

I disagree, the time is now. The clock started ticking in 2012, as far as I'm concerned. It's been three years of being in the discussion with no hardware to show for it. I bet Riz has got a major itch. Damn if the moves so far this year haven't been for the win now ... IMO.

 

That doesn't mean you completely ignore the future prospects. This isn't a mutually exclusive thing. It's not like we're in Yankees territory with bloated contracts and aged players. It's not like we all of a sudden don't think about replenishing the pipeline. But, I got to say personally, I didn't like getting rid of Walters nor Souza.

 

But to say that the moves all indicate, point, to the philosophy of being competitive in 3 years ... I say no. The team is competitive right now. The questions to ask are, what can we do right now in order to win a World Series in 2015? That is the most important year, because it's here, now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slateman

Slateman

Posted
Posted

MLB contracts cannot be restructured. They are full guaranteed. Cutting a player does nothing to diminish the salary as there is no cap. There is no motivation for the player to renogiatiate unless the Nats are going to give the player more money. The Braves are still paying Dan Uggla. Bobby Bonilla will be collecting a paycheck from the Mets for the next 15 years.

The Nationals are probably 175 million in terms of the luxury tax. The amount a player earns is not his luxury tax number. Also, other things affect the luxury tax such as the 40 man roster, travel expenses, healthcare, and any buyout years of any remaining contracts. Mutual options can also affect it. All told, the Nats probably have about 10 million under the luxury cap. More here: http://mobile.philly.com/blogs/?wss=/philly/blogs/phillies_zone/&id=140752863

I wouldn't mind CarGo. I just question whether he's worth the money. He struggles to hit away from Coors (Arizona is also a hitter's park)

So lets talk about Jay Bruce. There are some pretty massive differences between him and Morse. Bruce can steal some bases and run decently. Bruce has a good arm. Bruce is not a liability on defense. However, Morse hits for average.

I didnt mention Morse's 2013 because he spent most of it on the DL. When Morse is healthy, he mashes.

As for OPS, Bruce has posted three years of regression at the plate. Moreover, the last three seasons, his strikeouts have increased and his walks have decreased. He is what is known as a decling asset. Morse has not shown this tendancy yet.

Jay Bruce is not good enough to start on this team. Not unless we see a tremendous drop off from Werth or Harper, in which case, Bruce is going to do little mitigate it.

Brantley is simply not feasible unless you're willing to part with Giolito, Cole, Turner and another piece. I'm not. Pretty obvious Rizzo isn't.

Speaking of Rizzo, he is NOT in win it all now. Every move he's made or attempted to make has been about long term success and keeping the window open for as long as possible. Scherzer's salary was designed to not inhibit the club from signing guys to long term deals. Trading Souza for a long term, middle infielder. Trading a guy with one year for a guy with three years of control. Attempting to trade Zimmerann and/or Desmond for long term pieces. Everything he has done was to keep the window open as long as possible. To be like the Giants, Cardinals, Tigers, or Braves. The Nats farm system is deep and it's only going to get deeper. In the coming years they should have plenty of payroll flexibility and plenty of new talent remain competitive. The window is now. It's also the next five years.

The playoffs are a crapshoot and everyone knows it. The Giants have two players who would start over their counterparts on the Nats. They've won three World Series. They've done it by getting clutch performances and great managing. You can't predict or spend for post-season success.

The situational hitting is well documented on this board. Frankly, the Nats struggled to do things like hit sac flies and move runners over. Too many times they had guys like Harper/LaRoche/Desmond/Espinosa up only to watch them whiff. They need a change of hitting coach and a mentality that with this pitching staff, they need to push across a run when they can instead of trying for the five run rally. You want four runs against the Giants in October. They needed one.

Hitting with RISP has been shown to be statistically indifferent to normal hitting. One year of success does not equate to a repeatable ability. And again, you bring up Brantley. The Nats have a better shot at trading for Trout or Stanton than Brantley. Hes cheap for thr next four years and, if last season wasn't a fluke, going to be a Top 3 LFer for that entire contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RemoveSnyder

RemoveSnyder

Posted
Posted

MLB contracts cannot be restructured.

 

That's actually not the complete and total truth. Or else you better call up Jeremy Guthrie and let him know he was hornswoggled. More here: http://m.mlb.com/news/article/66528396/kansas-city-royals-jeremy-guthrie-restructure-contract

 

I never said anything about cutting a player in order to avoid paying his guaranteed contract. Nor did I say wave a magic wand and magically make guaranteed money turn into performance based incentive money.

 

I simply said restructure. 

 

Hence the smiley, from earlier. A pretty darn limited avenue, I grant you. Likely affecting very little. And in the case like with Guthrie, one is talking about a backloaded contract, shifting money to future years. Not ideal. 

 

But if the AAV is calculated for the luxury tax, and it includes the (guaranteed) buy-out money, then I wonder what exactly the Royals are trying to do (?).

 

And a Bobby Bonilla reference. Nice. 

 

Hey, while we're at it, do you mind telling me, in the uber advanced saber-metric parlance, just how average and replaceable one of my childhood baseball idols, in Jim Rice, really is. Because, I'm basically used to people telling me how much I don't know about baseball and how ineffective the players I like, really are.

 

Not mad, BTW. Just humor.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Forehead

Forehead

Posted
Posted

already told the boss that I'm taking off every single day game in the summer.  can't wait to live somewhere i can walk up to metro and go to the game and not worry about parking

 

I would totally come up with some big project you'd have to do that would just happen to coincide with many of these games, especially if you tried to "tell" me when you were taking off. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
skinfan2k

skinfan2k

Posted
Posted

I would totally come up with some big project you'd have to do that would just happen to coincide with many of these games, especially if you tried to "tell" me when you were taking off. ;)

 

Haha.  The good thing for this assignment is everything i do is a long term project and i determine the deadlines and when the meetings are :)

 

Every supervisor i have had i already told them i am taking off whenever a DC sports team wins a title lol.  Hasn't happened yet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...