Nationals Farm Authority

{ 46 }

Comments

1. Positively Half St | 07-Jul-08 at 8:22 am | Permalink

   It’s great to have you back.

   Pokey Reese in Hagerstown? Pretty funny.

   Nats320 suggests that Alex Escobar be brought up to replace Dukes instead of Casto. I agree.

   Finally, I realize that the Nats still have until August 15 to sign draft picks (or is it earlier this year?), but I am starting my annual gnashing of teeth. What is taking them so long with all of their top draft picks?

2. Brian Oliver | 07-Jul-08 at 8:26 am | Permalink

   PHS - The Nats chose some tough signs early this year.

   Crow reportedly wants a major league contract and above slot deal.
   Hood has college football as a negotiating tool
   Espinosa is represented by Scott Boras
   Hicks still has college as a fallback
   Nieto reportedly wants above slot as well

   I’m still not too concerned though I’d hope the Nationals would get Hood, Espinosa & Hicks done sooner rather than alter.

   Crow & Nieto both seem like last minute signings to me.

3. Brian Oliver | 07-Jul-08 at 8:33 am | Permalink

   Googling this AM

   26th rd pick Cory Mazzoni … “Cory Mazzoni, who is headed to North Carolina State despite being drafted by the Washington Nationals”

   50th rd pick Fernando Frias … “His GW teammate Fernando Frias, a right fielder and tremendous hitter, was picked in the 50th round by the Washington Nationals, but he plans to play ball at Miami Dade College instead, according to GW coach Steve Mandl.”

4. Positively Half St | 07-Jul-08 at 8:42 am | Permalink

   Thanks. You expected a number of later round picks to decline the team’s offer. As we have seen, though, MLB clubs have a way of trying to get the same guys later. I guess the pick is an indication that your scout likes a kid more than others do anyway, so I guess this makes sense.

5. A DC Wonk | 07-Jul-08 at 8:45 am | Permalink

   Replacing Dukes . . . Escobar is a good option. What about one more try for Langerhans? Granted, he was awful with the Nats last year, but he’s been very solid for Columbus this year.

   Thoughts?

6. Brian Oliver | 07-Jul-08 at 8:48 am | Permalink

   re: A replacement for Dukes. Casto still seems the most likely option, though Escobar is worthy of consideration. Personally, I’d bypass Langerhans. He is what he is and I’m not sure there is anything to find out with him.

7. j | 07-Jul-08 at 9:08 am | Permalink

   Welcome back Brian, how was NW Arkansas? My sister lives in the booming metropolis of Bentonville.

   Any chance Mike Daniel is the next OF up?

8. JayB | 07-Jul-08 at 9:12 am | Permalink

   Brian,

   Two questions please…..Any idea why the roster spot was not filled in time for the Game yesterday? Second, given the relative small amount of money spent each year on signing draft picks, why would a team decide to save say 20% of that money at the cost of a year of development in the system? Marlins top pick is signed and playing in their system….our top five are sitting at home. Does this make baseball sense?

9. Brian Oliver | 07-Jul-08 at 9:13 am | Permalink

   Bentonville was very nice. Does your sister work for a “large retailer” like many of the folks in the area?

   I got to check out the new stadium in Springdale. Very nice ballpark. Open concourse. Good sightlines. We had seats three rows behind home plate at $12/ticket.

   Daniel is definitely a consideration but I’m not sure how many lefthanded OFs the Nationals can use.

   RH OF = Kearns & Pena
   LH OF = Bernadina & Harris

   The day-to-day status of Boone and Young might make Casto the choice because he can play 1B/3B as well as OF.

10. Brian Oliver | 07-Jul-08 at 9:18 am | Permalink

    JayB - No idea why they didn’t fill the spot sooner. Seems with Columbus in Indianapolis and the Nats in Cincinnati, they’d have been able to get Casto or Escobar in town for the game.

    As for the draft pick signings. Sometimes it’s not a matter of the Nationals holding off on signing guys as much as it is MLB “recommending” that overslot deals get delayed in order to control bonuses for other players. Skipworth signed for right around slot with the Marlins so that would explain some of why he is done and others are not.

    I’d argue that for someone like Crow, there isn’t anything necessarily lost developmentally in limiting their playing time. College pitchers have typically thrown quite a few innings and teams are going to be cautious with adding to that total.

11. JayB | 07-Jul-08 at 9:26 am | Permalink

    Brian,

    Good point on Crow. Thanks

12. Brian Oliver | 07-Jul-08 at 9:30 am | Permalink

    Though I agree with you that getting guys who are willing to sign close to slot (say within 10-20% over) signed early is the best course of action. I know nothing specific about any of the negotiations with the top five but the Nationals are in a position where they almost have to get them signed as quick as possible given the way the wheels are falling off at the major league level.

    As of today, the Nationals have a 1.5 game “lead” in the race for the #1 pick in 2009.

13. EdDC | 07-Jul-08 at 9:39 am | Permalink

    It seems like a tough, long road to MLB success to wait on prospects to develop. What is your take on that, Brian?

    In some ways a quicker route to success is to keep all your drafts picks, like the Nats are doing, and sign quality free agents that do not require sacrifice of draft picks. Those free agents that pan out can be dealt for prospects or they would yield additional draft picks when they are signed by other teams at the end of their contracts.

    This approach seems superior to the Nats’ strategy of signing old, slow free agents (D. Young, Lo Duca, Estrada) or guys who never have demonstrated that they can hit much at all (Harris, Macoviak) and are not really worth a roster spot, much less future prospects.

    Of course, signing quality players takes more money, and there are not that many quality free agents out there. But there are some.

    Signing quality free agents has the added advantage making the MLB games watchable and thereby attracting a fan base, adding a greater revenue stream. It means more initial out-of-pocket expenditure, but overall revenues would be higher.

    Of course the Nats’ current approach could yield a #1 or #2 overall pick, so it has some upside too.

14. Brian Oliver | 07-Jul-08 at 9:50 am | Permalink

    EdDC - I had a posting on that topic back in December of 2006. I basically described your secenario of targeting free agents that do not sacrifice a draft pick (today, that would only be Type A). There is value in signing Type B free agents as well as borderline Type B guys. In today’s compensation, the only cost is a newly created sandwich round selection.

    In my opinion, “The Plan” would be better served in taking advantage of the existing compensation system as much as possible. Teams like the San Diego Padres have become very adept at doing precisely that, having a menu of Type B guys that they can get sandwich picks for when they sign elsewhere (arbitration offered/rejected, of course).

15. John | 07-Jul-08 at 9:53 am | Permalink

    I never root for my team to lose, but I’ll admit the idea of Strasburg and Crow 1 and 2 is pretty exciting.

    It sounds like Donovan Tate(Georgia HS CF)is starting to get more and more hype. A five tool CF that bats left-handed.

    I also like Alex White of UNC. He was throwing 94 with a very nice breaking pitch in the CWS.

16. Brian Oliver | 07-Jul-08 at 9:59 am | Permalink

    John - Tate is going to need to really wow in the showcases and in 2009 to make himself a 1-1 (1st round, 1st overall).

17. Tofu Dog | 07-Jul-08 at 10:00 am | Permalink

    What does the 2009 draft class look like now. It does not appear there is a Pedro Alvarez or David Price that seems a lock for No# 1, but the Tar Heels pitcher Alex White looks good. Who else is out there?

18. John | 07-Jul-08 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    I doubt he passes Strasburg. I was mentioning him as an option if they don’t get #1. I think only injury or possibly Boras keeps Strasburg from #1. That kid is seriously special.

    That being said if Tate starts to look like the next Griffey, you never know. Apparently, he’s been very impressive so far and has already improved his draft stock.

19. John | 07-Jul-08 at 10:05 am | Permalink

    Tofu: San Diego St. pitcher Stephen Strasburg is the clear #1 and I think he’s better than Price. He throws 94-97 easily and can hit 100 when he wants. he also has a nasty slider. His changeup is solid and improving. He struck out 23 batters in a game and had 133 Ks to 17 BBs this past season.

20. Tofu Dog | 07-Jul-08 at 10:10 am | Permalink

    I’m there. Let’s hope Strasburg stays healthy. At this point losing games for the Nationals is starting to “hurt so good.”

21. JD | 07-Jul-08 at 10:14 am | Permalink

    Signing free agents that don’t cost the Nats draft picks should be an obvious part of “The Plan” as it has the potential to add future draft picks as well as improve the product on the field.

    The only cost (which should be nominal) comes out of the owners pocket. I am still waiting for the significant investment in this team and its farm system from the owners. I was hoping to see more investment “in the system” outside of getting up to the major league average in scouting, coaches, etc and last years draft. We don’t seem to be spending big dollars in the D.R. even though with 2 teams and have little presence in other international markets. Please inform me if you think this assessment is inaccurate. If we aren’t going to sign free agents, we need to invest more heavily than the average MLB team in player development.

22. Pilchard | 07-Jul-08 at 10:26 am | Permalink

    Justin Jones came out in the 1st inning of yesterday’s start in Harrisburg. Did he get injured?

23. Brian Oliver | 07-Jul-08 at 10:29 am | Permalink

    Pilchard - From what I can gather, it was a similar situation as to what happened to Ross Detwiler earlier this season, he met an organizational pitch count for one inning’s work. Reports had him at 38 pitches in the first.

24. EdDC | 07-Jul-08 at 10:45 am | Permalink

    JD,

    Your questions get right to the difference between Plan A: an ownership and front office package that will produce a winner with patience, or Plan B: an ownership that will cut corners on the MLB team and even the farm system, with the goal of producing respectable teams down the road that draw fans and produce a profit.

    I guess it is too early to tell, though some good Type B free agent signings and more high-ceiling international signings would let us know that the ownership has Plan A in mind more than Plan B.

25. expo_ram | 07-Jul-08 at 10:48 am | Permalink

    Pilchard, I was thinking the same thing. The gamer just said he threw 38 pitches and didn’t get out of the first. However, only giving up 1 doesn’t seem like it deserved the quick hook. It was after a long rain delay though - maybe he just wasn’t comfortable.

    If we ended up drafting Strasburg (and we actually sign Crow), can you imagine our minor league rotations!?!?

26. Andrew F | 07-Jul-08 at 10:57 am | Permalink

    Re: picks - Detwiler wasn’t considered to be a difficult sign and he agreed to terms around the July 4th holiday last year. I can’t be too worried yet.

    Also, was there anything up with Burgess last night? Looks like he got pinch hit for in the 7th inning.

27. Cole | 07-Jul-08 at 11:13 am | Permalink

    BA’s Jim Callis recently discussed the signing of high priced Latin American prospects, and he seemed to favor signing lots of low-priced talent rather than the few high-priced prospects:
    “Q: I always thought investing a lot of money in a 16-year-old kid was a poor move because they’re so far away in their development. It seems teams would be best off signing a lot of players to smaller bonuses than a few to really big ones because of the high degree of uncertainty.
    A: Projecting high school players is difficult enough, but at least they’re a couple of years older and can be measured against some quality competion on the showcase circuit. Investing heavily in international amateurs requires a lot of faith in being able to determine what they’ll be like 7-10 years down the line.

    BA’s Ben Badler and John Manuel have done a lot of research recently into the history of international amateur bonuses, putting together top 10 lists for both Latin America and the Far East. The results aren’t encouraging.

    Six of the Latin Americans have had at least five years to develop, and Cabrera ($1.8 million from the Marlins in 1999) is the only one who has been able to carve out a role as a big league regular, let alone a star. The others are Wily Mo Pena ($2.4 million, Yankees, 1999), Joel Guzman ($2.25 million, Dodgers, 2001), Jackson Melian ($1.6 million, Yankees, 1996), Ricardo Aramboles ($1.52 million, Yankees, 1998) and Willy Aybar ($1.4 million, Dodgers, 2000). Melian and Aramboles didn’t even make it to the majors.”

28. A DC Wonk | 07-Jul-08 at 11:16 am | Permalink

    Brian — if you think 28-yo Langerhans will never be brought up again (he’s hitting .320 now), then what’s the point of keeping him?

    I say: give him one last shot. Fish or cut bait. Or, if not, trade him for anything. No point in keeping somebody who’s blocking the path of somebody else.

29. Andrew F | 07-Jul-08 at 11:32 am | Permalink

    Being at AAA, he’s not necessarily blocking anybody. You still need organizational guys to fill rosters.

30. Brian Oliver | 07-Jul-08 at 11:33 am | Permalink

    Wonk - This is just my opinion, but I have seen enough of Langerhans over the past season and change to know what he brings to the table. I’d rather they give Casto an extended look or give Escobar one more chance to prove he can stay healthy.

31. EdDC | 07-Jul-08 at 11:37 am | Permalink

    Here is a vote for DC Wonk.

    Lousy defense is whatt makes the Nats so horrid to watch.

    Dmitri at first base? The worst in baseball, plus he is too overweight to contribute even at the bat. His 10 RBI for the year is a historically bad number for a first baseman.

    Lopez at second? Not much, especially when he takes mind-vacations.

    Lo Duca and Estrada at catcher? I hereby extend to you an invitation to take second base, at your leisure.

    Pena in left? He allows more runs than he produces.

    So at least be respectable defensively. Langerhans gives you good defense, and has had some good minor league years. He gets my vote too. Casto can stay, since he plays defense. Let’s dump some defensive losers.

32. EdDC | 07-Jul-08 at 11:39 am | Permalink

    OK good point, Escobar or Langerhans AND Casto.

33. John | 07-Jul-08 at 12:09 pm | Permalink

    I’m coming around on the quantity over quality thoery on IFAs the more I read. Eury Perez, Adrian Sanchez, and Hanley Ramirez have really made me change.

    I’ve also come to change my opinion on Brian’s type B/A thoery. It makes sense and I was very much on board, but now I think it’s not necessary.

    1) It’s early, but it seems the Nats have shown they can find talent in later rounds.

    2) The less high picks you have the more money you have for tough signs that slip. It looks like there are first/second round talents that fall every year.

    3) You have to offer arbitration to get the picks. You just don’t know what’s going to happen. Look at Barrett in SD. You know they didn’t want him to say yes.

    4) Injuries/poor play. See F. Lopez, P. Lo Duca, and J. Estrada. All are taking up roster spots and salary with no chance of being offered arbitration to get the picks they’d bring.

    While it’s a sound theory, there are just way too many things that can go wrong. I think it’s better just to build your team as best you can and let the comp picks come naturally.

    Ideally, they’ll be bonuses when a guy like Kearns leaves, Burgess will be ready to play, plus you’ll get picks. Keep a cycle going constantly, and lock up your core guys.

34. Ric | 07-Jul-08 at 12:11 pm | Permalink

    The print edition of the Washington Post reported this morning that Casto is being recalled to replace Dukes.

35. JD | 07-Jul-08 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

    John,

    Like every strategy, you have to have the right people running them. None of the Lopez, Lo Duca, or Estrada were type B free agents. Lo Duca and Estrada were players nobody else really wanted.

    My point is that this team can play in the free agent market without impacting “The Plan” and could improve the results of the plan. Our draft in 2007 was widely considered better than 2008 primarily because we had extra picks in the draft and not really because we got McGeary (although there is no reason why we can’t do both).

    I don’t buy the argument that you get the same players (and sign them) in the later rounds that you get in rounds 1-5. It does happen but a majority of the drafted players in the majors were drafted in the earlier rounds.

36. John | 07-Jul-08 at 1:00 pm | Permalink

    JD: Actually Estrada was a type A and Lo Duca was a type B, just missing type A. I have no doubts the Nats were trying to do what you and Brian were talking about since this year was a throw away. They signed those two hoping to get some extra picks. Same with Odalis Perez. It’s just not smart to plan your team around the hopes of getting comp picks. The negetives outweigh the positives by a pretty wide margin as I believe I pointed out above.

    Also, it’s way too early to compare this draft to 2007. Last year no one rated the Nats as the top draft until the players started playing and proving it. I believe most had the Blue Jays and Texas as the top team early on. It was later in the year after so many Nats players kicked ass that they started being rated number 1 by everybody.

    IMO, this year’s draft will be better if Crow becomes what he’s capable of being. A legit #1 that combines velocity and command the way he does is immeasurable. Also, they seem to have found some very good players later and even after the draft(which was my point).

    Don’t get me wrong, I like the extra high picks, but I just don’t think intentionally signing players for that purpose is a good strategy as this year has shown. The way to go is to sign/draft the players to help your team and take the extra picks as bonus.

    Another point is that Brian’s example, San Diego is almost as bad as the Nats and I believe they have a terible farm system. I’m not sure I’d be using them to strengthem an argument.

37. Steve | 07-Jul-08 at 1:04 pm | Permalink

    Anyone know who was sitting next to Bowden at yesterdays game?

38. Brian Oliver | 07-Jul-08 at 1:09 pm | Permalink

    How San Diego use their picks has been open to debate, but the fact that they have extra picks available is what I am focusing on.

    A team like the Nats has to put a team on the field and they are not going to go with a 25-man roster of players with no major league experience. I did not have a huge problem with bringing in one veteran catcher because I believed the Nationals were going to allow Flores to develop in the minors as a starter and they needed someone to serve as a one or two year starter. The second catcher (in this case Estrada) made less sense to me.

    With that thought in mind, they had to sign some bats for the bench. Mackowiak and Harris were redundant to me, one would have sufficed. Boone was a worthwhile RH gamble off of the bench. I do not believe Bowden was signing players only to turn them into picks. No team should do only that. What my suggestion for the Nats is to invest in one year deals for Type B guys or close to Type B guys who can help your team in a given year. The hard part is finding the right guys, but honestly if you get 2 or 3 Type B guys at the end of the year, it’s a worthwhile gamble.

39. John | 07-Jul-08 at 1:13 pm | Permalink

    Another point I’ll make before resting my case.

    Let’s say the Nats did sign Lo Duca, Estrada and Perez for Brian’s purpose. It’s certainly possible.

    Now imagine if they hadn’t. They could have a bigger budget to buy guys like Ramirez and Silverstein out of college. Hindsight is 20/20, but that’s my point on this strategy. There’s just way too many ways it can cost you if it doesn’t go right.

40. John | 07-Jul-08 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

    Brian: It may be worth the gamble in years where you know you’re going to be awful, I can see that argument, but what if it cost the Nats a top IFA or a guy like Silverstein or Ramirez? Would it be worth the gamble then?

41. Brian Oliver | 07-Jul-08 at 1:17 pm | Permalink

    John - You cannot mix money. The dollars the Nationals would not have spent on Lo Duca et al would not have gone to signing draft picks. The Nationals had a budget for their 40-man roster and a budget for scouting/player development. It’s not a one-for-one thing. I believe the Nationals had a targeted amount to spend this year and who they signed in the 2007 off-season had little play in who they can sign from the 2008 draft.

42. Stephen Strasburg. | 07-Jul-08 at 2:36 pm | Permalink

    Brian: Regarding signing draft picks, only Beckham at $6.1 million and Skipworth at $2.3 million are signed amongst the top 12 picks. As you point out, many will sign on August 15.

    The pick before Hood signed for $737k and after him signed for $715k. That suggests his offer is $725,ooo. Hard to believe it will take too much longer for him to come to his senses and sign on the dotted line. I don’t see how he could play football and up that payday without taking a huge chance.

    Espinosa slots at $438,000, again it is hard to see how he can risk holding out for much more. Hicks slots at $265,000. That is a lot of money to leave on the table, too.

    Nieto slots at around $180,000. Interestingly, the Orioles picked Avery in the second round and paid him $900,000, at least $100k over slot. I wonder if they promised similar money to Nieto? I am guessing that Nieto would like something close to Hood’s slot money. The Nats went over slot and paid King $750,000 two years ago, but he was a little higher pick, I think.

    It would seem Hood and Espinosa would benefit from signing soon. I wonder if folks don’t think they can hold the Nats over a barrel given their poor record. At this time, there is no advantage to overpay, of course.

43. Andrew | 07-Jul-08 at 2:37 pm | Permalink

    Strasburg, Crow, and Balester would make one hell of a power rotation. Throw in Detwiler if he ever comes around and that is a lot of power arms.

44. MiLBfan | 07-Jul-08 at 3:46 pm | Permalink

    Andrew, throw in pitchers VanAllen, Zimermann,and Alaniz, as well as Zinicolo and Carr out of the bullpen, and things look good…

45. Dick | 07-Jul-08 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

    If you Google the San Diego State baseball website and look under media, you can see each strike Strasburg threw in his 23 strikeout performance. It takes awhile, that’s a lot of strikes! It also makes you feel better, considering we have a game and a half ‘lead’, as Brian points out. He would have struck out a bunch of big leaguers with stuff like that!

46. Dick | 07-Jul-08 at 3:58 pm | Permalink

    Zimmermann certainly qualifies as a power arm in my book. So does Carr. Alaniz definitely isn’t. VanAllen probably wouldn’t meet the definition, either.

    Power arms are great, good pitchers, even better! Wakefield, Moyer, Glavine and Maddux have won about 1,000 games between them; two are sure-fire hall of famers. None are power arms, however!

Post a Comment