The Washington Nationals Thread: The Future is Near!

[Riggo#44]

27 minutes ago, skinsmarydu said:

Playing the World Champs tonight.  🤔

Pfft. 161-game champs.

[bearrock]

3 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

 

To be honest, based solely n the WaPo article, I think the most likely outcome is that not much changes.  They are having an outside consultant assess their options.  It's been very clear for a long time that the Lerners want to make a ton of money on their investment (as one would expect), so having a consultant look under the hood every once in a while makes sense.  They might change the structure a bit or bring in a minority investor or two, and that could be for many different reasons entirely unrelated to baseball (like tax avoidance, to gain liquidity for other ventures, etc), but it seems like a change in the fundamental ownership of the team is not a forgone conclusion here. 

 

 

 

 

Agree and wanted to add that unless Ted and Annette Lerner actually own a very small share of the family ownership pie, they'd be kind of insane to sell now.  The first to pass would leave the spouse with their share of the ownership with a step up in basis.  The surviving spouse could sell the inherited share to the children or to third party with no capital gains.  Then when the surviving spouse passes and leaves the surviving spouse's own ownership share to the children, the children would get step up in basis.  By selling first and then inheriting, they'd pay hundreds of millions in additional capital gains on top of the eventual inheritance tax.  It would make no sense.

 

At most, you'd see a minority owner brought on for cash infusion with buy option exercisable after the passing of Ted and Annette Lerner.

 

The timing is concerning though, since any kind of ownership instability over the next few years could effect decisions pertaining to Soto.

[PleaseBlitz]

11 minutes ago, bearrock said:

Agree and wanted to add that unless Ted and Annette Lerner actually own a very small share of the family ownership pie, they'd be kind of insane to sell now.  The first to pass would leave the spouse with their share of the ownership with a step up in basis.  The surviving spouse could sell the inherited share to the children or to third party with no capital gains.  Then when the surviving spouse passes and leaves the surviving spouse's own ownership share to the children, the children would get step up in basis.  By selling first and then inheriting, they'd pay hundreds of millions in additional capital gains on top of the eventual inheritance tax.  It would make no sense.

 

At most, you'd see a minority owner brought on for cash infusion with buy option exercisable after the passing of Ted and Annette Lerner.

 

They may also be restructuring any debt that they have (for the Nats and everything else in the Lerner empire), assuming they don't own the team outright, which almost certain.  It's a very good bet that interest rates are going to be going up significantly over the next 12 months and that strikes me as a pretty good reason for the family to take a good hard look at whether the current setup is optimal in a higher interest rate environment.    

[CRobi21]

Thought the Braves front office would have a little higher principals when it came to that POS Osuna...

 

Castro had similar legal troubles last year and Rizzo shipped him off immediately.

[EmirOfShmo]

8 minutes ago, CRobi21 said:

Thought the Braves front office would have a little higher principals when it came to that POS Osuna...

 

Castro had similar legal troubles last year and Rizzo shipped him off immediately.

What did I miss reading about Osuna? 

[bcl05]

I’m really liking Frandsen on the broadcasts so far.  

[CRobi21]

22 minutes ago, EmirOfShmo said:

What did I miss reading about Osuna? 

 

Suspended last year for domestic abuse charges.

[mammajamma]

good start

[CRobi21]

I love Josh Rogers!

[mammajamma]

that was unexpected

[Bacon]

Clown pounding!

[Riggo#44]

Ugh...NOT Leonsis...

 

[TheGoodBits]

13 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

Ugh...NOT Leonsis...

 

Leonsis is… ok. Not sure he’d commit to to a top 5-8 payroll every year but I also think he’d support continuity in the front office and staff. He doesn’t seem like a guy who is overly involved in the operations side of the teams he owns, which is a good thing. 

[Riggo#44]

1 hour ago, TheGoodBits said:

Leonsis is… ok. Not sure he’d commit to to a top 5-8 payroll every year but I also think he’d support continuity in the front office and staff. He doesn’t seem like a guy who is overly involved in the operations side of the teams he owns, which is a good thing. 

Good for the Caps, bad for the Wizards. I'd hate to be saddled with the baseball version of Ernie Grunfield. The good thing about the Nationals is Rizzo is proven as one of the best GMs in the league, so maybe it would be ok? We'll see, maybe he gives Soto a massive deal and he's a Nat for life. 

 

Edit: Barry Svrluga was just on 106.7, saying he is fairly certain they are going to sell...

Edited April 12, 2022 by Riggo#44

[TheGoodBits]

13 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

 

Edit: Barry Svrluga was just on 106.7, saying he is fairly certain they are going to sell...

My take on the news yesterday was that the idea they would consider selling wouldn’t hit the press unless they were very serious about selling. 

[ixcuincle]

Lmao at people freaking out over Leonsis. He's a good owner.

3 hours ago, TheGoodBits said:

Leonsis is… ok. Not sure he’d commit to to a top 5-8 payroll every year but I also think he’d support continuity in the front office and staff. He doesn’t seem like a guy who is overly involved in the operations side of the teams he owns, which is a good thing. 

See you won't have any Snyder meddling with him. I don't understand why people are so upset.

 

"He mismanaged the Wizards"

 

How so? By keeping Ernie on too long? And don't people like Tommy Shepard?

 

The Wizards problems go beyond Ted. They're just a **** franchise and they've been **** since '79. That's not on Ted.

[Renegade7]

3 hours ago, TheGoodBits said:

Leonsis is… ok. Not sure he’d commit to to a top 5-8 payroll every year but I also think he’d support continuity in the front office and staff. He doesn’t seem like a guy who is overly involved in the operations side of the teams he owns, which is a good thing. 

 

I know this sounds crazy, but I'd rather Snyder own the Nats then Leonsis.

 

Leonsis  is clearly afraid of the Luxury Tax in the NBA, the idea of Snyder finally free of a rigid salary cap like the NFL sounds way more interesting.

 

We already know what we"d get with Leonsis , would be exactly what people fear, an owner acting like his team is mid-Market when DC is a top 10 TV market.  It's doom for the Wizards and would be double doom for the Nationals.

26 minutes ago, ixcuincle said:

Lmao at people freaking out over Leonsis. He's a good owner.

See you won't have any Snyder meddling with him. I don't understand why people are so upset.

 

"He mismanaged the Wizards"

 

How so? By keeping Ernie on too long? And don't people like Tommy Shepard?

 

The Wizards problems go beyond Ted. They're just a **** franchise and they've been **** since '79. That's not on Ted.

 

Lerners are clearly meddling with Rizzo.

 

Having said that, Ted should not be off the hook for the failures of the Wizards since taking full ownership, it's been over a decade now, everyone Abe Pollin brought in is gone now.

 

I'll add there's no way Snyder has the capital he needs to buy the Nats and build a new stadium, so I doubt he throws his hat in the ring in this one.

 

****, part of me would rather have Bezos then Leonsis, I've seen enough, man.

Edited April 12, 2022 by Renegade7

[ixcuincle]

I'll say it again and for the last time (this is a Nationals thread) but nothing Ted could do could make the Wizards relevant. Unless he goes out and buys LeBron James and Bronny and AD. You have to understand the NBA model is VERY tilted towards buying superstar talent. Ted can't do that in DC. Therefore the Wizards fail every year.

 

It's a systemic problem of the NBA same as Sacramento, New Orleans, Charlotte, Orlando, and any small market club.

 

"But Charlotte and New Orleans are making the playoffs!"

 

Yeah, and will they win their play in games?

 

Even if they did the #1 seed is just going to truck over them.

Edited April 12, 2022 by ixcuincle

[Renegade7]

33 minutes ago, ixcuincle said:

I'll say it again and for the last time (this is a Nationals thread) but nothing Ted could do could make the Wizards relevant. Unless he goes out and buys LeBron James and Bronny and AD. You have to understand the NBA model is VERY tilted towards buying superstar talent. Ted can't do that in DC. Therefore the Wizards fail every year.

 

It's a systemic problem of the NBA same as Sacramento, New Orleans, Charlotte, Orlando, and any small market club.

 

"But Charlotte and New Orleans are making the playoffs!"

 

Yeah, and will they win their play in games?

 

Even if they did the #1 seed is just going to truck over them.

 

This is nonsense, superstars can be drafted, LeBron was drafted. Gannis was drafted.

 

Golden State wasn't on the map until Curry got fire, Thunder went to the finals with what will now be three different HOF players that they drafted one after the other.

 

You think Memphis is gonna have any problem getting people to sign to play with Ja now?

 

Ted messed up by letting Ernie set the team to self-destruct in order to get KD on the team, Otto was a bust, can anyone name a single first round pick during the Wall Era outside Beal and Otto?

 

Superstars can also be traded for, we know this because he did that with the Mystics and won a championship.  The closest we've seen the Wizards do that is for Westbrook.

 

Tying back to the Nats, again, I've seen enough with Leonsis that I wouldn't be optimistic about being anything more then competitive if he took full ownership.  His most successful franchise is literally wasting the arguably the best hockey player in history's career with all these first round exits and only one championship to show for it all (someone the caps drafted)

 

Hard pass.

Edited April 12, 2022 by Renegade7

[Riggo#44]

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

Tying back to the Nats, again, I've seen enough with Leonsis that I wouldn't be optimistic about being anything more then competitive if he took full ownership.  His most successful franchise is literally wasting the arguably the best hockey player in history's career with all these first round exits and only one championship to show for it all (someone the caps drafted)

My very, very limited understanding of the NBA is that it's a star-driven league, maybe because of the smaller rosters? But it seems the big BIG stars win. Baseball is much different--Trout has been to the playoff once. Harper has never won a playoff series. Much like hockey, being competitive is enough to win a championship--have a hot goalie, a hot pitcher or 2. Get a hot hitter/scorer and that can carry you. When was the last time you say a 4-5-6 seed in the NBA finals? (I seriously don't know, I never got into the NBA). Wild Cards and lower seeds can, and do, roll though the MLB/NHL playoffs.

[Renegade7]

5 hours ago, Riggo#44 said:

My very, very limited understanding of the NBA is that it's a star-driven league, maybe because of the smaller rosters? But it seems the big BIG stars win. Baseball is much different--Trout has been to the playoff once. Harper has never won a playoff series. Much like hockey, being competitive is enough to win a championship--have a hot goalie, a hot pitcher or 2. Get a hot hitter/scorer and that can carry you. When was the last time you say a 4-5-6 seed in the NBA finals? (I seriously don't know, I never got into the NBA). Wild Cards and lower seeds can, and do, roll though the MLB/NHL playoffs.

 

Yes, very different sports, I touched on why I still have concerns, but I get your going with this and want to respond based on points you are bringing up.

 

Looking back, typically the lowest a seed will be and win the finals (not jus get there) is the #3 seed.

 

Having said that, my point stands that drafting and even trading for superstars are a huge part of building contenders outside of jus signing them.  And while baseball teams may have larger rosters, drafting will still matter (in the context of needing a solid farm system and avoiding having to sign outside players versus bringing them up in house).

 

I admittedly follow the other DC teams more then the Capitals, but one thing I've noticed with them is the high level of turnover in their front office (regarding GMs) and Head Coaches, usually tied to their incredible high number of first round exits in context of the years they got knocked out.

 

Someone else will have to speak to how well the Caps draft, but what I can see is they have done a crap job building around what they have drafted well.  This is a similar problem with the Wizards and Wall, then trading for Della-Donne it seems like one excuse after the other why this isn't working or that isn't working since they won their championship.  I don't know what's going on with Emma and now Tina Charles is gone almost as soon as she got there.

 

Bringing it back to the Nats, my two major concerns with a Ted ownership will be drafting and building around what we draft right, this being based on what he's done with his other sports franchises.  This debate is interesting because it is rare for a potential buyer to have this level of body of work with other franchises for fans to look at and debate.

 

Edited April 12, 2022 by Renegade7

[Warhead36]

Leonsis would be fine. Could we get better ownership? Sure. But you're more likely to get someone who sucks. Leonsis will spend reasonably(nobody outside of Bezos would put us in Dodgers or Yankees spending category)and not meddle with Rizzo and the baseball ops. He's also a pretty forward thinking guy with how he's integrated sports betting into Monumental sports

 

Better the devil you know as they say...

[Riggo#44]

9 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Bringing it back to the Nats, my two major concerns with a Ted ownership will be drafting and building around what we draft right, this being based on what he's done with his other sports franchises.  This debate is interesting because it is rare for a potential buyer to have this level of body of work with other franchises for fans to look at and debate

I would hope whoever the new owner is, that he lets Rizzo do his job. There are very few teams who have done what the Nats have done the last 10 years. Yes they need to draft well, which we haven't done lately. Hence why Rizzo overhauled the scouting and development system this past offseason. The other side of that is the International Market--where we've done very well and have been aggressive. We'll see how this unfolds, I just hope that we don't see actual bad ownership, not the perceived one we currently have.

[Renegade7]

4 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

I would hope whoever the new owner is, that he lets Rizzo do his job. There are very few teams who have done what the Nats have done the last 10 years. Yes they need to draft well, which we haven't done lately. Hence why Rizzo overhauled the scouting and development system this past offseason. The other side of that is the International Market--where we've done very well and have been aggressive. We'll see how this unfolds, I just hope that we don't see actual bad ownership, not the perceived one we currently have.

 

Fair, and my concerns are Lerners aren't really letting Rizzo do his job, but that doesn't mean I was ready for the devil I didn't know (or might, depending on Ted). Lerners may have been considering selling for a minute now (maybe as soon as they won the WS), no telling what impact this has had on our recent offseasons.

[Riggo#44]

5 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Fair, and my concerns are Lerners aren't really letting Rizzo do his job, but that doesn't mean I was ready for the devil I didn't know (or might, depending on Ted). Lerners may have been considering selling for a minute now (maybe as soon as they won the WS), no telling what impact this has had on our recent offseasons.

Rizzo has a lot of say--going back a number of years, he basically told the Lerners that if they didn't let him trade for Doug Fister, they could fire him. They were balking at trading Robbie Ray. Ray has turned into a really good pitcher, but he wasn't going to help us 8 years ago.