The Washington Nationals signed an additional five players to minor league contracts:
- RHP Tristan Crawford: The 25-year old Crawford joins the Nationals after eight seasons in the Twins organization. He has pitched primarily out of the bullpen with an occasional spot start. Over 395 career innings, Crawford has allowed 415 hits and 233 runs (187 earned) while striking out 352 and walking 139. He should pitch out of the bullpen for Columbus in 2008.
- RHP Steven Shell: After seven seasons in the Angels farm system, the 24-year old Shell joins the Nationals system. Shell pitched primarily out of the bullpen for the Angels Triple-A affiliate where he was 7-3 with a 4.73ERA over 31 appearances (7 starts). He was also a member of the World Cup winning Team USA team where he made three appearances with no record and a 13.50ERA. Shell is a control pitcher without overpowering stuff. He should see a spot in the Clippers bullpen.
- 1B Luis Jimenez: The 25-year old Jimenez split the 2007 season between the Triple-A affiliate for the Red Sox and the Double-A affiliate for the Orioles. Primarily a DH at this point (though he has played some 1B), Jimenez slugged 22 home runs for the Bay Sox over 320 AB. The Clippers appear to have their 2008 DH.
- 3B Yurendell De Caster: The 28-year old played the last seven seasons in the Pirates organization. In 2007, while playing predominantly 1B, De Caster batted 280/380/413 with 9 home runs and 54 RBI. De Caster has played not only 1B, but also 3B and corner OF. He seems likely to be a member of the Clippers in 2008.
- OF Jason Dubois: The 28-year old outfielder has bounced from the Cubs to the Indians to Orioles over his seven-year major league career. Over his minor league career, he has batted 289/367/521 with 130 home runs. He seems targeted for Columbus in 2008.
Three more months | 21-Nov-07 at 5:44 pm | Permalink
Thanks for this. Since the Nats have done nothing at the major-league level, this is all we’ve got going at the moment. I know the Nats are letting Larry Broadway and Brandon Watson go, for instance, but with these 5 and the ones from the other day, it seems some more Columbus players will need to be released.
JayB | 21-Nov-07 at 7:26 pm | Permalink
Sure looking like we are still in the business of inviting all the old retreads from the rest of the MLB. Will this always be the case? Do the teams that we want to model after like ATL and ARZ do this each year? I am getting tired of just running out anyone new to pitch after 3 years in WAS. It was very depressing to read your comments Brian that you expect to see some of these guys get their MLB debut in 2008 with the NATS……..
Brian Oliver | 21-Nov-07 at 8:41 pm | Permalink
Most of these guys signed are strictly to populate the roster in Columbus. This not unlike how most teams treat their Triple-A franchise (Braves included). The reason I expect a few MLB debuts from this cast of signings is that no team gets through a season without having to call upon their Triple-A team a few times. It’s going to take more than two years to repopulate the farm system such that there would be homegrown players available at the higher levels.
Three more months | 21-Nov-07 at 9:14 pm | Permalink
I imagine that if the Plan works as intended, the Nats will eventually be among the teams that shed players this time of year. Until the minors are well-stocked, though, I welcome these attempts to upgrade the system.
I think a more realistic short-term indication of the progress the team makes is how soon they stop taking players in the Rule 5 draft. The Nats took 2 last year. I am curious about whether they will take any players in the Rule 5 draft this year.
Wooden U. Lykteneau | 21-Nov-07 at 10:49 pm | Permalink
I would tend to agree with the assessment that the system is being restocked in stages and even over halves. Until there’s depth at every level, you’re going to see “a tale of two halves” in Hagerstown, Potomac and Harrisburg. If there’s one place that might get to see the same set of kids the whole year long. I can only hope that Potomac will be next in 2009. Perhaps by then, you’ll see less of the quantum leaps like Detwiler, Maxwell, and Lannan.
Wooden U. Lykteneau | 21-Nov-07 at 10:50 pm | Permalink
In 2008… Harrisburg will get to see the same basic set of kids.
Hendo | 22-Nov-07 at 12:23 pm | Permalink
Most of these are “organizational” signings — understood, and no problem from where I sit.
The big issue anyway isn’t AAA, it’s AA. Until Harrisburg is able to field a roster of honest-to-goodness prospects, I’d expect and hope to see the Nats continue to troll the waiver wire and Rule 5, and to trade appropriately to continue to stock the cupboard.
Painful as it might be to contemplate, it would be a net win for the MLB club if it ended up minus Belliard, Cordero, Schneider and Young (and losing 100 in ‘08), and Harrisburg / Potomac ended up plus six to eight average-plus or better prospects (and improving markedly between July ‘08 and September ‘09).
The focus needs to be on 2010. Any time frame shorter than that will force the Nats to bet on a Pudge/CGuillen-type exacta in ‘08 or ‘09. Most teams that try that route not only don’t have the Tigers’ luck, they don’t even get out of the starting gate.
JayB | 22-Nov-07 at 1:24 pm | Permalink
2010…….no way, if they are focused on winning then they will have missed any hope of making this a baseball town. They must be at least 500 this year and in the race in 2009.
100 lost in 2008 and they can kiss selling seats for $300 good bye for the next 10 years. Nats would be the laughing stock of MLB if they go backwards in record. They can do both build and win…..draft picks are cheap and they have the cash to spend now and spend later. Should already have close to $100 Million in saved spending from the past two years if you look at Forbes and project estimates…….(I know not an exact science)
Ric | 23-Nov-07 at 12:40 am | Permalink
Don’t forget that these guys aren’t necessarily guaranteed a spot. There were several of these players signed last year before Spring Training that were released before final roster assignments (eg, Travis Lee, Bill White, Colby Lewis)
Jeff | 23-Nov-07 at 4:53 am | Permalink
Decaster is the best option for a third baseman when there might have been an Aaron Herr, Juan Richardson, Cody Ransom. What is next? replace Robert Fick with the former Blue Jay/Brewers 3b ?
Perhaps we should wait until December 6th and see what creative picks are made in Rule V and AAA/AA portions.
Jeff | 23-Nov-07 at 4:54 am | Permalink
ex-po fans tend to be more patient than the new WASH fans.
JayB | 23-Nov-07 at 7:56 am | Permalink
WASH fans paid for a $611 Million park and pay $300 to sit behind home plate……..Ownership has money and promised they would compete in 2008 if we gave them a pass on endof 2006 and all of 2007.
Wooden U. Lykteneau | 23-Nov-07 at 8:56 am | Permalink
“new WASH?” Sounds like an O’s fan in disguise. Guess it doesn’t matter that the Nats exceeded everybody’s expectations in ‘07 or that the minor-league system was allowed to rot for 5 years. That can be fixed overnight, right? And those $300 seats will be filled every night with real baseball fans, and not suits and schmoozers, too?
Tofu Dog | 23-Nov-07 at 11:01 am | Permalink
I agree that it is a realistic expectation that the team improve in ‘08. Most fans are not going to wait until ‘2010. Baseball is a business, not the play toy of pretend intellects. Tampa Bay has tried to build almost exclusively from the draft and is a good example of what you get from that approach. The Angels may have the deepest farm systems in baseball, but they went out and got Tori Hunter while everyone in DC is pretending to be Bill James, running the numbers, decrying Hunter’s decline. Last I heard James was still on the Red Sox payroll. They do it all, take the talent where they can find it and spend money when they have to–just like the Angels, another winning franchise. Our television contract may not be as lucrative as John Henry’s but we have money to spend. Spending a few dollars to improve the team and being smarter than the Angelos family seems an easy goal and one I endorse.
Hendo | 23-Nov-07 at 12:41 pm | Permalink
“Baseball is a business, not the play toy of pretend intellects. Tampa Bay has tried to build almost exclusively from the draft and is a good example of what you get from that approach.”
Gee, if I were Chuck LaMar, I’d feel really, really insulted by that assertion.
“The Angels may have the deepest farm systems in baseball, but they went out and got Tori Hunter . . .”
The Angels are a perennial playoff contender, and their acquisition of Torii Hunter is a statement that they want to stay that way in ‘08. His present value is considerable. What has been debated to a greater degree is his longevity, which is open to speculation by everyone from Tony Reagins — who must have at least fair degree of confidence in Hunter’s out years to get a $90M commitment from Arte Moreno — down to the most pretentious intellect.
Also, that Halos farm system didn’t just pop up overnight. Not only does a successful team need to be committed to building its system, but having a forward-thinking front office with a Bill Stoneman in the GM’s chair (and a Reagins in charge of player development) didn’t seem to do a bit of harm.
JayB | 23-Nov-07 at 4:28 pm | Permalink
Fick is missing from the 40 man roster……yes! now we are making progress….when did this happen. I do not see anything in the transactions history……
Hendo | 23-Nov-07 at 4:39 pm | Permalink
Fick declared free agency on October 29:
hartmanbirge | 24-Nov-07 at 9:58 am | Permalink
The LAST thing I want to see is the Nationals go out and spend on these prima donna follow the top-dollar guys. They have no loyalty. By nature they are traitors. What I would like to see is internal development and if we’re going to spend top dollar then spend it on our own guys. I give two flips in hell about Tori Hunter. Good for him to get all that dough….but he’s already probably past his prime. Wanna know why the Yankees always break down? Look at the age of their roster! I like “The Plan” a lot…. build your own….add as you have to… but keep your own… it will take more than a few years…and if fans can’t hang then boo-hoo for them… once you start winning the fans will come - regardless. If the fan base can’t comprehend patience then who the hell wants them? We want fans with passion and who understand how a team is built - not some traitor-crew with a win or else mentality. Would I prefer that we go out and spend 90 million on Tori hunter or would I prefer that we develop Maxwell and let him grow into the team from within? One of the two would be a REAL National… the other one would always be evidence that we were too incompetent to do it ourselves…. No brainer.
JayB | 24-Nov-07 at 12:04 pm | Permalink
No need to be a one way or the other andMaxwell is nowhere near ready if ever to be as good as Hunter or Rowland or Jones. It is very unlikely he will ever even get 500 ABs in his whole MLB career at this point of his development. Maxwell has proven very little and is nearing an age where he is past prospect status.
Winning teams do both, develop their own and sign free agents or high dollar trades when their own are not ready. That is where the Nats. Braves, Angles, Boston, all sign free agents or trade for high salary proven players when they have nothing in the pipeline. Why do you think Tampa Bay is always so bad and always has the best prospects?
Nats do not need to wait 5 years to develop their own draft picks; they can win now and win later just with a different. A practical approach is what they need.
JayB | 24-Nov-07 at 12:17 pm | Permalink
The best season the Nats ever had was 2005 being lead by Vinny Castillo at 3rd base and Esteban Loaiza on the mound. That was a great ride and nobody cared that Vinny was not an Expo the year before. Winning is what is needed now. Don’t really care how they do it. Sure in the long run it might be cheaper and thus more money to Uncle Ted if they develop within but that is his concern. Winning is what will make the season fun for everyone and turn Washington into a baseball town. Losing year after year will turn that new park into another monument to losing baseball in Washington.
hartmanbirge | 24-Nov-07 at 3:18 pm | Permalink
“was 2005 being lead by Vinny Castillo at 3rd base and Esteban Loaiza on the mound.”
You have GOT to be kidding me! You’d rather watch a washed up rock like Castillo and a pitching staff that was old, creaky and on the constant verge of implosion over what we had this year - Zimmerman, the new additions of Kearns and Lopez, and young pitchers who are on the cusp of development and could be with us for a decade at least? Anyone remember Ortiz? What was he? 38? Wow. That was a team with no future, no past, and no present. At least now we have the future to look forward to and a present which shows a team that hustles and competes. I happen to prefer watching a team that loses a few more games but is young and has a future over a team that finishes .500, hits the highlight reel a few times, and is destined for the graveyard. Would I rather watch a kid off the waiver wire like Hanrahan who can light it up at 95mph or would I prefer to watch in total frustration as Tomo Okha throws flutter ball after flutter ball anyplace but the strike zone. One guy has potential, the other has reached his miserable peak though perhaps he wins two or three more. Would I rather watch Jose Guillen who did nothing but bitch and moan about the ballpark or would I rather watch Wily Mo Pena mash 500 foot moon shots with the flick of his wrists? I’ll take this team over that team any day of the week. And I happen to like teams that have the competence to develop in-house rather than the Oriole or Yankee model of constantly being in crisis and having to spend their way out of their problems. One is endurable….the other is a recipe for late season collapse…
JayB | 24-Nov-07 at 5:12 pm | Permalink
Just win, that is my point.
Ortiz was not on the team in 2005. Yes Vinny was much better to watch than Lopez who would not hustle for $5 Million or his teammates.
More wining about the part this year then ever in the past. I do not care if they are young or old. I care about winning games. THe 2005 team was in the race until the last few weeks. 2007 was out of the race after just a few weeks……you have your view I have mine.
JayB | 24-Nov-07 at 5:37 pm | Permalink
Oh and do not forget Jamey Carrol who I found fun to watch instead of Lopez, Wislon and Jimmerz, but hey you pick your who you think plays sound fundimenta baseball and I’ll pick mine.
JayB | 24-Nov-07 at 5:45 pm | Permalink
Sorry about the typo’s damn Blackberry!
Anyhow……Joel Hanrahan ? He will not pitch in the Bigs again and only the Nats 2007 were cheap enough to go with whatever they could find……if they do that again in 2008 then we they misjudged the market for $300 seats.
Wooden U. Lykteneau | 24-Nov-07 at 7:35 pm | Permalink
Hartman - I wouldn’t worry about the opinions of someone who clearly has never seen Justin Maxwell play in person and lacks a “fundimental” understanding of tiered ticket pricing.
JayB | 24-Nov-07 at 8:34 pm | Permalink
John Sickels releases an annual edition of “The Baseball Prospect Book” where he uses letter grades to assess 30-35 prospects from each MLB organization Justin Maxwell Graded as a B which = “Most end up spending several years in the majors, at the very least in a marginal role.” Does that sound like Hunter, Rowland or Jones?
Maxwell is 24 years old already an started the year in A ball last season……I have seen him play in person and he is fine but not likely ever to be a star centerfielder and not worth holding open CF for him just in case. He was completely overmatched in the Fall league with players much younger than him.
Nats have to stop thinking like a poor step child of MLB and start acting like a team that will do what it takes to win now, and 3-5 years down the road. It is not one or the other unless you have closed mind and feel somehow losing is beneficial to the franchise.
JayB | 24-Nov-07 at 8:46 pm | Permalink
My season ticket went up 37% and I understand in revenue management. What I know is my first class customers do no like poor service and bad food when they pay top dollar. Nats seem to have a lot to learn about pricing if they think running Bascik, Chico and Lannan out to the mound again this year is going to work with the new pricing model they established.
Ryan Sullivan | 24-Nov-07 at 11:13 pm | Permalink
JayB-
I appreciate your passion, and I agree with the sentiments of your argument, but I think spending money to spend money is a foolish way to go. I stand somewhere between what you say (spend money D***it) and the other side of the argument (those who are concerned with the Lerner’s financial situation for some reason). I think you use the money you spend to take the best gambles, and find the best value for your dollars.
With that said, in terms of our huge CF problem, I disagree with your stance about signing Jones, Hunter, or Rowand. Obviously Hunter is a lost cause, but I will lump him in with those two. If the Nationals are run as a top 10 baseball market, and payroll, albeit at the very back end of the top ten, but a top ten market, that should be about $90 million in payroll, in todays dollars. To pay someone $14 million (Rowand), or approximately $18 million (Hunter/Jones), they would be costing between 15-20% of the entire payroll. That would be understandable for someone as solid as A-Rod, Pujols, Jose Reyes even, but Hunter/Jones/Rowand are a large step down in class from those that deserve to be in this pay range. Any time you sign a free agent, you are taking a large gamble, and all of these players should decline in the coming years, and all have injury risks associated with them. Since I mentioned gambles earlier, my recommendation is the Nats should acquire Elijah Dukes to fill CF.
Most, if not all Nats fans appreciate that a 81-81 season would be considered a success on the field in 2008. Since this will not qualify us for the playoffs, why not take a low risk/high reward gamble on a talented, but extremely flawed individual in Dukes. His trade value is at an all time low, his salary will cost about 1/40th of what Rowand, Hunter, and Jones will cost, and could post within 80-85% of the production of the big three. He is 23, and while his behavior is gross and disgusting, he could simply be a troubled 23 year old kid who has never lived with boundaries and is rebelling. Or maybe he is a lifelong screw up. But lets say he has a 50-50 chance of reaching his potential, which is near, if not equal to Hunter/Jones/Rowand: that said, wouldn’t you want to risk trading a Shairon Martis or a Saul Rivera to acquire Dukes, instead of gambling on a $70-100 million dollar player, which probably would not give us more than 5 more wins per season than our backup plan (Church/Logan)?
hartmanbirge | 25-Nov-07 at 3:31 am | Permalink
I’ll take my chances with Dukes. And remember, at 23 that his upside could even go well beyond some of these high priced guys - physically at least. If Hunter were 27 years old I might feel differently - then he would have his best years coming. But not now…now he’s going to face inevitable decline so the team would be in position of having a huge chunk of payroll allocated to a player with declining skills which to me seems bassackwards - I would want my salary scale to be increasing as a player’s skills and development increased, not the inverse. I guess I’ve seen the Redskins do it the wrong way for too long and it just becomes disgusting.
JayB | 25-Nov-07 at 8:45 am | Permalink
Interesting……yes I would want to trade Saul or Martis for something of potential (not Dukes but that is just my feeling on his past I think). That said, I would not forgo a sure thing in FA to build the future of this team. They must stop thinking that somehow not spending money makes them better. It does not make them better it makes Teddy richer. They need to make sure they follow are .500 in 2007 and above in 2008. To do that they need a proven CF bat, some SP and some Bench help not name Fick, Lopez, Jimmerez and Batista. That is going to take money spent now and I agree not in Redskin style and it does not need to be Jones or Rowland but it does need to be a sure thing, not a Dukes and a prayer.
JayB | 25-Nov-07 at 8:46 am | Permalink
ops .500 in 2007 and better in 2009
JayB | 25-Nov-07 at 9:05 am | Permalink
Rowland is not Brandon Loydd and Jones is not Bruce Smith….Nobody is saying spend like the Redskins. Even so the problem with spending in NFL is the Salary Cap. Skins make so much money if it were not for the Cap even these moves would not hurt them.
Nats have no cap and have much better organizational structure. Ted is not picking the players like Dan is. I feel the Redskins analogy is just rationalization to feel good about an organization who is charging big bucks for bargain basement talent at this point. As long as we support that why would they change the model? Three years from now will they still be in the bottom 1/3 in league salaries while in the 8th largest market? That is any business mans dream but I want WINS not CASH for TED.
Many teams like the Red Sox, Tigers and Angles are doing both winning with FA and Building the Farm. It can be done.
Scott | 25-Nov-07 at 9:30 am | Permalink
The most frustrating part of the economic situation is the one-sided television contract Selig and MLB signed with Angelos. My understanding is that there is no termination date. So, the Nationals are burdened with this arrangement indefinitely.
If anyone is familiar with the term of the contract, please comment.
Dick | 25-Nov-07 at 10:39 am | Permalink
The model for winning with free agents sits just 40 miles up the Parkway. Did I say winning? And I am not even using a Crackberry to type this. You simply cannot build a team through free agency, certainly not in a short period of time. Farm system either. Patience is required. If you don’t have it, follow the O’s or the ‘Skins. The Wizards did great when they got impatient and signed Michael Jordan, didn’t they! Fact is, the team was bad but the revenue stream greatly improved. Maybe Stan and Teddy WOULD make more money by signing FAs. Maybe they know Washington only supports a winner so they better build one. Plus, Washington’s track record shows they would see a tremendous increase in attendance if they won, say 90-95 games. Folks here aren’t turned off forever, only by losing forever.
JayB | 25-Nov-07 at 11:17 am | Permalink
The Model is Boston, Angles and Tigers….nobody is saying FA only……I am saying both like the above teams who have been winning and developing Farm System.
The argument that it is the O’s and Redskins or TB and Florida is such a simplistic view.
Dick | 25-Nov-07 at 12:11 pm | Permalink
The Red Sox only took 86 years for The Plan to come together. Have that much patience? Tigers lost 100 and how many games? 116 wasn’t it. Have that much patience? Doesn’t sound like it! Farm systems take years to develop.
The point folks are trying to make is that a free agent replacement may be warranted for Maxwell by the time Marrero is playing first, people like King, Flores and Burgess are starting and Detwiler, Gibson and others form the rotation. If you find Maxwell doesn’t cut it, that is when you get a free agent as a missing piece. Not now.
By the way, John Sickles rated Hunter a C to C+ prospect. http://www.minorleagueball.com/story/2005/4/12/132517/981.
It is not that hard to be 81-81 every year. Just trade multiple prospects for average or slightly above average big leaguers. It gets hard if you try to win at least 90 every year and 100 every now and again. Where do stars come from?
VladiHondo | 25-Nov-07 at 1:07 pm | Permalink
No team can win by “just” building the Farm system. What turned around the Tigers was signing a Big Free Agent in I-Rod, who no one else wanted at his price, and a smaller one in Rondell White. Just as important as I-Rod, was a trade that netted them Carlos Guillen. Another trade got them Nate Robertson, who then jumped into the starting rotation. So they went from 43 wins to 72.
Their farm gave them the core that lost 119 in 2k3, from that bunch, Bonderman, Inge, remain contributers today. Eventually Granderson and Verlander came up through the farm, but they were joined by Magglio Ordonez (FA), Placido Polanco (trade), Kenny Rogers(FA). That’s what made them a 90+ win team.
JayB | 25-Nov-07 at 1:19 pm | Permalink
Big difference in Hunter, Rowland or Jones is not how they were rated 10 years ago but what is known about them now. That is the power of FA….you know which of the 100’s of C players each year, which turn out to be starts. With Maxwell chances are very slim as with any one player in your system. The point is that Nats need a known, proven player, not a maybe.
Nats have had done their share of losing in my opinion the past two years and it is now time to move forward not with some pipe dream that someday 18-21 year olds will become super stars but rather putting in proven players at the MLB level and drafting best players and paying them (as they are doing now). Do both, they have the money and spending it now does not hurt or prevent them from spending it 5 years from now.
What Lerner and Stan want us to think is they are just putting savings of the past 2 years into a fund. Well if that was so they would already have over 50 million to spend on top of an additional 50 million from new park revenue in 2008…..yup they could use that and be spending $150 million this year.
Under your plan for next 5 years they will have over $300 million to spend when Burgess is a star (what are the odds really?)……..think they will spend it them or just enjoy a good laugh and take the profit?
Wooden U. Lykteneau | 25-Nov-07 at 3:00 pm | Permalink
Dick - Actually, since Theo Epstein assumed the GM’s role in Boston, they have won two (2) World Series using a blend of homegrown (Pedroia, Youkilis, Ellsbury, Lester) and FAs (Drew, Lugo, Schilling, Matsuzaka). The comparison to the Red Sox is also quite specious, given that the franchise has had 70 seasons of .500 or better baseball and also went 70 seasons without finishing last (1932-1991). Developing talent has never been this franchise’s problem; keeping it has been the challenge.
JayB - Speaking of the BoSox, would you agree with the Nats trading for Coco Crisp — even if it meant giving up Marrero? If you want to win now, wouldn’t it make sense? He just turned 28 and is under contract until 2009 with a team option in 2010 and would likely benefit from changing leagues and being given more freedom to run.
JayB | 25-Nov-07 at 3:36 pm | Permalink
I would trade Marrero because he seems like a DH and no defensive position in the NL. I would get starting pitching and leadoff hitting for Marrero and sign a FA Centerfielder. I have not seen Coco enough to have an opinion. Think that is what scouts get paid for. My point is to spend now made now and sign the best draft picks you can (do not need to be first picks, check Yanks and Tigers Drafts), trade what makes sense to trade, (DH types) now and win now.
Louis J. | 25-Nov-07 at 7:01 pm | Permalink
The comments are wild…must be too much turkey the past few days. Flash- the Nationals are going to stay with their plan of building the farm system; no long-term & expensive free agents until the Nats are a player away; bargain trades that add a young veteran or prospect and continue to improve the team’s “revenue stream” namely make sure that they make more $$$ than the previous year. Our postings here are our attempts to play GM. But remember, businessman Mark Lerner, baseball man Stan Kasten & GM Jim Bowden are driving this train.
JayB | 25-Nov-07 at 8:19 pm | Permalink
Thanks for the reality check….I guess we are looking at Nook and Church in CF again and Basick and Hanrahan with Fick and Jimmerz off the bench…..what fun! At least Lopez will have priced himself out of the plan and I will not have to watch him dog it anymore.
Dick | 25-Nov-07 at 8:47 pm | Permalink
Wooden U etc.: Of course the argument I posed was specious. Just not as specious as trading away all of your prospects for marginal big leaguers. Marrero for Coco Crisp? A sure recipe for never winning more than 80-85 games for a generation! But you already know that.
The point is, you don’t throw money at the problem by signing FAs for the sake of signing them. It doesn’t solve anything.
But Theo built his team through mostly the farm system with a few key FAs at key positions. That sounds EXACTLY like Stan’s Plan. Will it work here? Who knows? I don’t have a crystal ball. Why not? But, as was pointed out, you get Ellsbury and Pedroia that way. You also get Beckett and Lowell when you have a Rookie of the Year to trade from your farm system. Hanley Ramirez!
What you can’t do is panic and try to make up for 5 years in the wasteland of MLB ownership in one offseason.
Here’s a good trade for you: 20-game winner Bartolo Colon for three low minor leaguers. Nevermind, Omar already did that one to us!
Anybody that ever played Monopoly knows you get $200 to pass Go. In baseball, you get 50 rounds each June, plus bonus picks for LOSING free agents. Plus international amateur FAs. Japan, etc. That is the baseball equivalent of passing Go. Draft wisely, accumulate talent, develop prospects, trade surplus for needs and augment with Free Agents. Theo knows, Brian Cashman knows, too. Stan knows and has done it before. Rox were built that way, Rizzo built the Snakes that way. Maybe someday all of us, including JayB, will see that Plan bear fruit here, too!
Dick | 25-Nov-07 at 8:49 pm | Permalink
And Louis J., thanks for adding that Baseball is a business. If you don’t get that, you’ll be VERY disappointed following the game passionately. I am always shocked that this even has to be pointed out to people, yet it always does! Thanks again.
Suns Fan | 26-Nov-07 at 1:17 am | Permalink
Jones hit .223 this year, and was batting seventh in an anemic Atlanta offense when they were in D.C. in September. Maxwell will likely hit above .223 his rookie year…