Nationals Farm Authority

{ 18 }

Comments

1. estuartj | 28-Aug-08 at 10:16 am | Permalink

   Update on the Alvarez Contract situation;

   MLB and the Pirates say the grievance is without merit, while Boras says the Bucs violated MLB’s rules and need to “come clean.” Dejan Kovacevic says the sides have not yet discussed the idea of more money, dismissing the idea that Boras demanded another $200K. An arbitrator will make a binding decision on this case on September 10th. Most believe Alvarez will remain a Pirate with a $6MM bonus.

   By the way, Royals GM Dayton Moore is not concerned about Hosmer’s contract.

2. MO Nats Fan | 28-Aug-08 at 10:18 am | Permalink

   Would you rather pick 11th with Alvarez in the draft or pick 10th w/o him?

   The post above says most believe Alvarez will remain with the Pirates, but what happens if he doesn’t - does he go back into the draft for ‘09 or what?

3. Berndaddy | 28-Aug-08 at 11:01 am | Permalink

   The way I see it is MLB won’t let this go without a fight. We may not know for a while, eh…

4. Steveo | 28-Aug-08 at 11:06 am | Permalink

   Yes if the arbitrator rules that the contract was void or that the team and Alvarez have to work out a new deal and can’t get it done, he will return in the draft. As for your question I would rather have the 10th pick than the 11th with Alvarez. I will admit i’m bias My family is from PA so i root for the Pirates when they are not playing the Nats and I’d hope to see them get a quality player like Alvarez. Secondly If Alvarez won his case and did have the contract void that would potentially affect other players, Hosmer Posey, as well as it would further give power to these agents like Boras and Hendricks. I just don’t think they need any more power than they already have.

   Also I don’t think having Alaverz would affect the Nats draft too much, sure you could take him at 1 but why pass up Stasburg. As for the 10th pick my guess is unless there is some phenom out there they will look for a slot player. I know most people think ’slot players’ are the Lerners being cheap or something to that effect but if the Nats had taken a slot player with their pick instead of Crow someone like Wallace, Weeks or Hicks they’d be looking pretty smart right about now.

5. Cole | 28-Aug-08 at 11:30 am | Permalink

   MO Nats Fan,
   It depends on where the Nats are picking. If that’s second, then I might rather have Alvarez in. If its third, I’d definitely want him in.

6. MO Nats Fan | 28-Aug-08 at 11:33 am | Permalink

   “if the Nats had taken a slot player with their pick instead of Crow someone like Wallace, Weeks or Hicks they’d be looking pretty smart right about now.”

   That depends on who they get with the 10/11 pick next June. I think it’s probably a wash on 10 vs 11 w or w/o Alvarez, he wouldn’t make it that far unless he gets hurt so the talent to spot ratio remains the same…

7. Greg | 28-Aug-08 at 11:56 am | Permalink

   Love the tragic number tracker. But having a hard time wrapping my brain around the tragic number. In the explanation it was total number of “wins/losses” to clinch. Are we assuming losses are wins, in that the tragic number is the number of losses needed to clinch #1?

8. Brian Oliver | 28-Aug-08 at 12:05 pm | Permalink

   Greg - Easiest way to look at it is this way.

   Count the number of games the Nationals have left
   Assume they win every single one to get their best possible record
   The “tragic” number is the maximum number of wins that team can get and still finish with a better (or equal) record than the Nationals

   Washington is 48-85 with 29 games left. Best they can finish is 77-85.

   Seattle is 50-83, if they win 27 of their remaining 29 games, they would also finish 77-85.

   And according to the tiebreaker rule (previous season’s record), the Nationals would get the higher pick.

9. hartmanbirge | 28-Aug-08 at 12:26 pm | Permalink

   This tragic number thing is a very beguiling feature Brian…. love it!

10. estuartj | 28-Aug-08 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

    It might be easier to follow if you also included the games behind.

11. Greg | 28-Aug-08 at 12:57 pm | Permalink

    Ahhhhh, I see. Great stuff. Thanks Brian!

12. shekb | 28-Aug-08 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

    But how many games “ahead” are the Nats?

13. Alan | 28-Aug-08 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

    Love the “tragic number,” and agree with estuartj that including “games behind” would make it even better. When I looked before yesterdays games, the Ms and the Pads were each 3 games behind (ahead?) of the Nats.

14. Steveo | 28-Aug-08 at 1:30 pm | Permalink

    “That depends on who they get with the 10/11 pick next June. I think it’s probably a wash on 10 vs 11 w or w/o Alvarez, he wouldn’t make it that far unless he gets hurt so the talent to spot ratio remains the same…”

    I def. agree with you that the talent ratio is a wash but I think getting a first round pick this year is more valuable than next year. Regardless of who that player may be for example had we not signed Detwiler last year we would have picked 7th say we took Gordon Beckham there (Alonzo and Crow had much higher bonus demands and the pick wouldn’t have the compensation protection the next year) where would we be. Now I love Beckham and think he will be a fine 2B (maybe a SS) but then we’d already be a year behind in development and more like a year and a half since Beck didn’t sign until right before the deadline. Now I know most people would say i’m crazy, Detwiler hasn’t been effective and Beckham had one incredible college year but I still think Detwiler was a fine pick last year. So what he’s struggled this year, its only his first full season and last year he was pretty effective. Pitchers like Lannan and Balester had their minor league struggles as well. There have been plenty of ML pitchers who have had some struggles in the minors. And whose to say that Beckham or the pick at 10 next year won’t struggle in their first minor league year, now your even another year behind in development. I feel the compensation pick is nice for the team it allows them some leverage and protection but it isn’t the golden egg for teams.

    Had the Nats went for a slot pick like Wallace, Weeks or even Hicks they would have been better off than whoever they can take at 10 next year. Wallace is already in AA, he could see time on the team next year if they need another bat for the playoff race (though I don’t know how you get him in the line-up with Pujols there). For the Nats he could be a starting 1B by midway next year. Even a HS like Hicks would be better than waiting a year for next years 10th overall pick. He is a 5-tool talent and has a shot of being up in Minnesota by Opening day 2011.

15. EdDC | 28-Aug-08 at 7:39 pm | Permalink

    Really, as many have been saying, it may not matter all that much passing on Crow–unless the guy haunts the Nats for years! Passing on Crow is truly a bad sign, though, for the future. He was the college pitcher of the year for 2008.

    Probably the bigger concern is if the Nats view themselves as a low-budget franchise. Having a little budget for signing draftees is a big shock to many of us. I know our season ticket club is falling apart over this.

    If there is still a Plan, and if a decent budget is restored for signing draftees and international guys, then the Nats can get back on track in 2009. However, if they stay tied to these little budgets for draftees (on top of low budgets for the major league club), then the franchise can clearly be viewed as having poor ownership. So the clue is if they start drafting for signability (slot money), sacrificing player quality.

    Baseball America has free podcasts from iTunes. You can go back and get several editions archived. On the August 18 podcast, they talked about how the slot system didn’t really apply too much to the first round, and how so many teams went over slot. They applauded small market teams for extending themselves with good draftee budgets (higher budgets than the Nats had, judging by Bowden’s comments). It seemed like the Nats tried too hard to play slot. Of course the agent for Crow was terrible, but we don’t know how the Nats acted either.

16. J. Cole | 28-Aug-08 at 10:18 pm | Permalink

    A healthy Dukes may be worth even 7 or 8 games on the tragic number countdown. Ripped LA tonight.

17. Danny Hicks | 31-Aug-08 at 9:03 pm | Permalink

    Graham has thrown 5 1/3 innings since joining the team in Melbourne two weeks ago. He has given up 2hits, no walks, 4SO and no runs. With our season being over he will go to Vermont in two days to pitch in a couple of games.

18. Brian Oliver | 31-Aug-08 at 9:48 pm | Permalink

    Thanks Danny

Post a Comment