Riggo#44 Posted January 16, 2020 Author Share Posted January 16, 2020 1 minute ago, StillUnknown said: they can't be called cheap, but they could very well prove to be shortsighted. That's fair. We shall see. I think we are in for an 85ish win season 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StillUnknown Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 Just now, Riggo#44 said: That's fair. We shall see. I think we are in for an 85ish win season that sounds about right. maybe a deadline move can get us to sneak in the playoffs again. I feel very strongly that if we make it, we will repeat. I just dont see us getting in, the offense will concern me until it proves me foolish 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 45 minutes ago, -JB- said: Nobody is ever happy lol 17 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said: I mean, spending $245m on Strasburg. Spending to improve the bullpen. Being one of the top offseason spenders, again...cheapass mother****ers! I mean, if “richest owner in baseball” meant anything, then the voluntary competitive balance threshold wouldn’t mean anything. I’m not saying the Lerners are cheap. I’m just saying they don’t act like the richest owners in baseball. So why even mention it? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 20 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said: I mean, spending $245m on Strasburg. Spending to improve the bullpen. Being one of the top offseason spenders, again...cheapass mother****ers! With bulk of the spending done, we're 10th in the league in salary (not even figuring in all the deferment). Considering all the extra income from the WS and that these are likely the final top level years from Scherzer, the chances are that Nats will never be cheap, but they are unlikely to maximize the DC market's full potential. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bacon Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 If we can reach the top 15 or so in runs scored, usually around 4.60-4.75 runs a game, I think we have a decent shot at making the playoffs this year. Doesn't really matter how they're generated. Our pitching will do the rest. Based on how this offseason is going, I am going to offer a hot take and say the NL East will take a step back this year. None of its contenders have improved enough to assert themselves in the division or the NL at large. The Nats and Braves lost arguably their best hitters from 2019 and have yet to replace them. The Mets don't have a manager. The Phillies had a good offseason and acquired a good manager, but will it be enough? We shall see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted January 16, 2020 Author Share Posted January 16, 2020 28 minutes ago, bearrock said: With bulk of the spending done, we're 10th in the league in salary (not even figuring in all the deferment). Considering all the extra income from the WS and that these are likely the final top level years from Scherzer, the chances are that Nats will never be cheap, but they are unlikely to maximize the DC market's full potential. All.the discussion of spending ignores the fact the Nats have the worst TV contract in baseball... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 8 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said: All.the discussion of spending ignores the fact the Nats have the worst TV contract in baseball... Even before adjusted by arbitration, MASN paid about 40 mil per year in 2012-2016 (should be higher now). That's middle of the road in MLB by 2019 standards. That's all before factoring in the increase in arbitration (which was covered by MLB loan, so they saw that money even if MASN is holding on to it). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander -JB- Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 2 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said: I mean, if “richest owner in baseball” meant anything, then the voluntary competitive balance threshold wouldn’t mean anything. I’m not saying the Lerners are cheap. I’m just saying they don’t act like the richest owners in baseball. So why even mention it? Because they are the richest owners in baseball. The Nats had one of the best overall records of the decade and just won a WS. I’d say the Lerners operate with supreme intelligence and hired a tremendous Front Office led by Rizzo. Complain if you will. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRobi21 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Meanwhile, in Nats land... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 38 minutes ago, -JB- said: Because they are the richest owners in baseball. The Nats had one of the best overall records of the decade and just won a WS. I’d say the Lerners operate with supreme intelligence and hired a tremendous Front Office led by Rizzo. Complain if you will. Ugh. Again. The richest owners in baseball refuse to go above the competitive threshold. What do you think Rizzo could do if he could go slightly above it and retain guys like Rendon? Probably build a dynasty. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 37 minutes ago, -JB- said: Because they are the richest owners in baseball. The Nats had one of the best overall records of the decade and just won a WS. I’d say the Lerners operate with supreme intelligence and hired a tremendous Front Office led by Rizzo. Complain if you will. Saying they can do better is not the same as they are doing a bad job. Rizzo's job is made harder by the ownership's budget and that budget has room to grow, there's no denying that. As it stands, we're on track to spend less than last year despite all the infusion of revenue from the championship. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 https://moneyinc.com/the-20-richest-mlb-owners-in-the-world/ I used to think Lerner was the richest, but #5ish is still damn rich. Point is.... Spending smart > spending biggest. Top spending teams rarely are WS champs Braves and Nats lost their all star 3B. Philles fired their manager and have SP depth issues. Mets don't even have a manager right now. Miami is Miami. So.... We don't know ****. I feel ok with our stability and veteran leadership with SP and pen now. Let's see how the spring training goes before making grand projections. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted January 17, 2020 Author Share Posted January 17, 2020 18 minutes ago, @SkinsGoldPants said: Point is.... Spending smart > spending biggest. Top spending teams rarely are WS champs Given how well we've done, for long time, how the Lerners are more than willing to pony up a big contract, I dont know why this is still a discussion. Part of the reason we've continued to be competitive is because we've not thrown money around all willy-nilly, nimbly-pimbly 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 10 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said: Given how well we've done, for long time, how the Lerners are more than willing to pony up a big contract, I dont know why this is still a discussion. Part of the reason we've continued to be competitive is because we've not thrown money around all willy-nilly, nimbly-pimbly Rizzo has stated his goal is the 90 win team every year for a chance to make a run. God knows things happen once in the playoffs. Better than the old Marlins win then blow it up imo. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted January 17, 2020 Author Share Posted January 17, 2020 14 minutes ago, @SkinsGoldPants said: Rizzo has stated his goal is the 90 win team every year for a chance to make a run. God knows things happen once in the playoffs. Better than the old Marlins win then blow it up imo. This is what makes Fartstein so wrong about the Shutdown. You never go all-in for one year. Stay consistently competitive, and get as many bites of the apple as you can. Crazy **** happens in the playoffs. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 1 hour ago, Riggo#44 said: Given how well we've done, for long time, how the Lerners are more than willing to pony up a big contract, I dont know why this is still a discussion. Part of the reason we've continued to be competitive is because we've not thrown money around all willy-nilly, nimbly-pimbly If you think Rizzo isn't going to put together a better team with additional budget instead of throwing money around willy-nilly, we'll just have to disagree. If you don't think Rizzo could do even better going forward with 10-15 million in additional budget, again, we'll just have to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander -JB- Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 3 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said: Ugh. Again. The richest owners in baseball refuse to go above the competitive threshold. What do you think Rizzo could do if he could go slightly above it and retain guys like Rendon? Probably build a dynasty. Bro, you can’t buy championships. The Yankees are on another level as far as market/spending goes and they went without a title last decade. No owner in baseball would pony up multiple 245 million dollar contracts in one offseason. It just isn’t feasible. Also, you have to have a guy want to re-sign. All the signs pointed towards Rendon bolting in free agency. It was a foregone conclusion. The Nats making that run and winning the WS gave us that glimmer of hope but he was always gone. They were never going to go way over market value to keep a guy. Especially when you have to lock up your WS MVP ace long term. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bacon Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 The big deal isn't even the overall number, it's the deferrals. The way we organize our contracts is a turnoff to big fish FAs and I'm sure it pushed away Tony as well. We do it for a reason, but you've got to expect it to backfire once in a while. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 9 hours ago, Riggo#44 said: This is what makes Fartstein so wrong about the Shutdown. You never go all-in for one year. Stay consistently competitive, and get as many bites of the apple as you can. Crazy **** happens in the playoffs. I agree Feinstein is an idiot. Again, the things that had to happen for the Nats to win it all. A misplayed Soto hit for the Brewers. Another Kershaw meltdown. The Cards.... well, we rolled them. Then the end of game 7. For all my anger at Davey earlier in the year. He made good moves and got lucky as **** in the playoffs that some of his riskier moves worked. the grinding back from 19-31 is one thing. The wins in the post-season are something different. Maybe Kieboom just clicks at 3rd and takes that spot. Maybe Robles takes that step that Soto did this year. Maybe Turner reaches a new level. Maybe we get actually RBI power from 2B. A lot of things could go right or wrong this year for them.....along with every other team in the division. What if Girardi's management style doesn't jive with the current Phillies roster? What if it's the Braves who have an unusually injured year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 I have no idea how people decided that Rendon didn’t want to come back and it would have taken an above market contract to get him. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 8 hours ago, bearrock said: If you think Rizzo isn't going to put together a better team with additional budget instead of throwing money around willy-nilly, we'll just have to disagree. If you don't think Rizzo could do even better going forward with 10-15 million in additional budget, again, we'll just have to disagree. He could do better with 30M more, or 50M more. Doesn't mean he'd give it all to one or two guys though. Maybe he uses it to extend Turner now, and signing more relievers, or a 5th starting pitcher. I'm not going to question the guy. When he gets it wrong, he fixes it quickly. When he gets it right, it's usually a pretty sweet find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 1 minute ago, @SkinsGoldPants said: He could do better with 30M more, or 50M more. Doesn't mean he'd give it all to one or two guys though. Maybe he uses it to extend Turner now, and signing more relievers, or a 5th starting pitcher. I'm not going to question the guy. When he gets it wrong, he fixes it quickly. When he gets it right, it's usually a pretty sweet find. I never said he would or should give it to one or two guys. I said Lerners should give him more budget because the market can support it and he can use it well. And no one here questioned that Rizzo has been incredible. Honestly don't know why giving Rizzo more budget would be a contentious issue with anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 14 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said: I have no idea how people decided that Rendon didn’t want to come back and it would have taken an above market contract to get him. Reporting, fwiw, was that deferment was a sticking point with the last offer to Rednon before start of the playoffs (tbf, I don't think it was take out the deferment and I will sign, more that I'm not even considering anything with deferment). Nats are not offering the numbers being reported in these offers (same thing apparently with Donaldson), which in turn often makes them low end or downright below market deals. And for all the reporting that Rendon's deal was a much less deferred offer than Harper doesn't mean much because Harper's deal was ridiculously deferred. Nobody who can do math would consider that a 10/300 offer and Rendon's offer was not 7/210-215, and apparently Donaldson's offer was equivalent to something like 80-88 mil over 4 years after factoring in deferrals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 4 minutes ago, bearrock said: Reporting, fwiw, was that deferment was a sticking point with the last offer to Rednon before start of the playoffs (tbf, I don't think it was take out the deferment and I will sign, more that I'm not even considering anything with deferment). Nats are not offering the numbers being reported in these offers (same thing apparently with Donaldson), which in turn often makes them low end or downright below market deals. And for all the reporting that Rendon's deal was a much less deferred offer than Harper doesn't mean much because Harper's deal was ridiculously deferred. Nobody who can do math would consider that a 10/300 offer and Rendon's offer was not 7/210-215, and apparently Donaldson's offer was equivalent to something like 80-88 mil over 4 years after factoring in deferrals. Right, you can calculate the present value of a contract with deferments. My issue was with: 7 hours ago, -JB- said: Also, you have to have a guy want to re-sign. All the signs pointed towards Rendon bolting in free agency. It was a foregone conclusion. I disagree with this part. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 16 minutes ago, bearrock said: I never said he would or should give it to one or two guys. I said Lerners should give him more budget because the market can support it and he can use it well. And no one here questioned that Rizzo has been incredible. Honestly don't know why giving Rizzo more budget would be a contentious issue with anyone. It's not. It's not like they are a bottom team in terms of payroll. Right now they are in the Top 10. Last year they were in the Top 10. 2018 they were in the Top 10. Same with 2017. I don't get the complaint here. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now