Greg Fiume - Getty Images
9 months ago: WASHINGTON, DC - AUGUST 25: John Lannan #31 of the Washington Nationals pitches against the Arizona Diamondbacks at Nationals Park on August 25, 2011 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Greg Fiume/Getty Images)
So, remember the John Lannan trade rumors which preceded the announcement that the Washington Nationals had signed 28-year-old right-hander Edwin Jackson? FOXSports.com's Ken Rosenthal and Jon Morosi wrote last week, in an article entitled, "Nats sign Jackson, shopping Lannan", that sources were saying, "Washington was aggressively shopping left-hander John Lannan," before they signed Jackson to what is reportedly a 1-year/$11M dollar deal. MLB.com's Bill Ladson wrote on Twitter (@washingnats) that he too had heard, "The #Nats are hoping to trade LHP John Lannan for a position player, maybe a center fielder."
When D.C. GM Mike Rizzo talked to reporters after confirming that EJax had joined the Nats, he stated clearly that the Nationals were, "... certainly always open to [making] a deal that makes sense for us, and if it can improve the ballclub, but we did not acquire Edwin Jackson to trade another starting pitcher." The Nats' general manager said they intended to use Lannan as they have in each of the last five seasons since the now-27-year-old left-hander, selected out of Siena College in the 11th Round of the '05 Draft, made his MLB debut. "We feel that he's a major league pitcher," Rizzo reiterated, "He's major league caliber and he's major league-ready to help a contending team and we feel that he's a solid major league starting pitcher and that's what we're going to use him as."

Boston Globe writer Nick Cafardo too wrote this morning in his weekly "Sunday Baseball Notes" column that the 6'4'', 215lb Lannan, who had a career low-3.70 ERA in 2011 to go along with a 4.28 FIP, 76 walks (3.70 BB/9) and 106 K's (5.17 K/9) in 33 starts and 184.2 IP, "... is a terrific option as an end-of-the rotation starter now that Washington has signed Edwin Jackson," but:
"There is a lot of speculation that the Nationals will deal him to the Angels for center fielder Peter Bourjos, with Mike Trout on the way to play that position in Anaheim."
This isn't the first time the Boston Globe writer has written about the Nats' interest in Bourjos. Mr. Cafardo notes, as the Nationals have all winter, that if they can't find a center fielder Jayson Werth could always slide over from right. "We do feel that we have in-house candidates right now that can fill that position very effectively," the Nats' GM told reporters in late December, "Jayson Werth could move to center field and then we would open up a bigger pool of candidates for a corner outfield position." Asked recently, however, if a move to acquire an outfield bat still seemed likely this late in the winter/close to Spring Training, Rizzo said, "We're not satisfied with not getting the long-term solution that we had [wanted], but we're satisfied with the in-house candidates and we feel that we're going to field the right kind of team going into Spring Training."
And as for finding a corner outfielder if Werth shifted to center, the general manager reminded everyone, "... we do have a power left-handed bat by the name of Bryce Harper in the wings, waiting to be fully-developed and help us on the big league level." Though the Boston Globe's Mr. Cafardo says the Red Sox don't have the center fielder the Nationals are looking for, "... especially with Ryan Kalish unable to play until June," the source he speaks to in the article tells him, "It doesn't have to be a center fielder,’":
"'They don’t have to get a center fielder in that deal as long as they get a center fielder some other way. The Red Sox make a lot of sense.’’
Does acquiring a corner outfielder make sense for the Nationals? Mr. Cafardo says he's heard the same things MLB.com's Bill Ladson's sources have about the Nats' interest in international free agent Yoenis Cespedes, that he's, "not in their plans" and he adds that, "they have cooled on B.J. Upton." Does the fact that the Nationals are no longer mentioned with Cespedes make it seem more likely they are interested at this point? #runsilent? It might depend on where Bryce Harper's likely to start the 2012 campaign. The Boston Globe baseball writer comments on all the chatter about the 19-year-old outfielder breaking camp with the Nationals in today's column as well. With all the moves Washington's made this winter, and with all the young talent present in the organization, Mr. Cafardo writes that, "The most fascinating player will be Harper,":
"General manager Mike Rizzo has taken a conservative approach, not wanting to overwhelm Harper, but there is clamoring for Harper to start his big league career now. There are mixed opinions within the organization, but manager Davey Johnson is on board with the 'now’ side. Harper would play right field, moving Werth to center."
An NL scout the Boston Globe writer speaks to for the article asks rhetorically, "'Could [Harper] handle the big leagues?,'" before answering himself, saying, "'Absolutely. Would it hurt to play some Triple A? Of course not,'" which is essentially what the Nationals' GM said recently when asked about Harper winning the job as the Nats' Opening Day right fielder. "I see him as a guy who doesn't need a whole lot of minor league seasoning," Rizzo told MLB Network Radio hosts Jim Duquette and Kevin Kennedy, "but it never hurts a player to go and get some at bats at a lower level than the major leagues."
The decision, however, will be based on Harper's performance and development, not anything else, the Nats' GM assured everyone during a recent appearance on ESPN980's The Sports Reporters. "It's certainly not contract-based, it's not service-time based," Rizzo said, "It's going to be strictly based on the performance of the player and the development of the player and those are two distinct differentials. This is a young player that has a chance to be a real star in the game. We're not going to retard his progress by being ultra-careful with him, but we're certainly not going to accelerate his progress in lieu of developing him correctly so when he gets to the big leagues he's there, he's comfortable, we're comfortable with him being there and he stays there and really performs for the long-term."
Spring Training can't start soon enough...
1 recs | 81 comments
If by some means the nats could land Bourjos
Then this team would have CF locked for years. Also an outfield of Werth, Bourjos, and Harper would certainly be one of the best out there. Considering that the infield in a few years of Zimm, Espinosa, Rendon, and Morse with Ramos at C is also seriously strong.
That being said, I don’t think that Lannan is the centerpiece for a trade to land Bourjos and something big has to be moved for Bourjos.
Mattionals - February 5, 2012
Note the writer who started that rumor
I think that’s just a case of Cafardo attempting to put two and two together. Someone on this site threw out a Lannan for Doubront + Che Hsuan-Lin swap and I think that’s the closest deal in terms of value and positional need that I’ve seen yet
ZimforPrez - February 5, 2012
Ehh,
I think Lannan could net a better bat than Hsuan-Lin. I’d rather have to trade Lannan plus prospects to get a better bat because we already have defense first CF options in the organization with ZERO bats. I’d rather keep Lannan than take that trade.
Mattionals - February 5, 2012
Lin's still projectable
And D-first options in center are not a bad idea. People have been saying we have mediocrity in center right now. But we don’t even have that. Cameron’s hardly a replacement player at this point, Bernadina’s been flaky defensively and inconsistent offensively every time they’ve tried him there (and he hasn’t played there for an extended period of time yet), Brown hasn’t even been able to hack it in AAA, and then there’s the non roster ST invites.
Lin’s at least shown some on base potential to this point. And that’s something that literally no one AAA or MLB ready in our org. has at this point. And he really wouldn’t be the centerpiece of the deal anyway. I’m not sure if Lannan could get much more than that
ZimforPrez - February 5, 2012
keep dreaming
Bourjos will have his age 25-29 years cost controlled and is coming off a 4 + WAR season. I’d like Lannan for Kemp, too, but neither is gonna happen…
William.Hatheway - February 5, 2012
Don't move any SP, Lannan included
Take in 7-8, you’re gonna have someone get hurt, and two guys are on IP limits. People are looking at the Nats having too many SPs in terms of what the norm in MLB is, and the Nationals aren’t in that situation. It’s unconventional, but I’m not even sure I wouldn’t want a 6 man rotation to save some innings, but that probably sounds stupid.
Whiter Mage - February 5, 2012
Only problem is where do you put the extra SP's?
jeff550 - February 5, 2012
only a couple of years ago, we were trying to sign a veteran SP, missed out on guys that are now looking for jobs or pitching in Japan
got a hurt Marquis……..
now, we have extra and don’t know what to do with them all….
cat daddy3000 - February 5, 2012
I don't think that's crazy at all
But they’ve already said they’re not doing that and they’ve said they’re not sending Lannan down. So trade is really the only route.
ZimforPrez - February 5, 2012
why couldn't you trade, say, Burnett, or Gorzo
and have Lannan go long relief and Detwiler normal relief until one or the other is needed? Lannan doesn’t have to be the piece that moves to make room for everyone…
William.Hatheway - February 5, 2012
We could do that
But we don’t know how Lannan serves as a reliever. And It would just take more shuffling around to move someone else instead
ZimforPrez - February 5, 2012
I like the idea of carrying 7-8 starters with Wang + Strasberg in the rotation, but...
…as jeff550 said, where do you put the extra pitchers?
The top 4 are a lock with Strasberg, Zimmermann, Gonzalez, and Jackson. Detwiler is going to the pen to start out the year. So if you keep both Wang and Lannan, then one has to start out of the bullpen. I guess it’s doable, but I’m not sure if either of them have the skill-set to succeed in the pen.
After Strasberg sits, and assuming Wang fails, then you still have two capable starters in Lannan and Detwiler to take over the 4 and 5 spots. I don’t like Gorzelanny starting, so this is preferable. So, unless you want Gorzelanny starting, or call up someone from the minors (unlikely after the Gio trade), you’re really relying on Wang holding up all year if you trade Lannan (as Detwiler is your only extra starter). I don’t like that, either, but I don’t know what you do in the short term. Put $4M/former top Yankees starter Wang in the pen?
mk7676 - February 5, 2012
get a VW bug.. I'm sure it can hold all our extra pitchers
dc Roach - February 5, 2012
can’t believe this isn’t rec’d to greenness………even the baby raccoons are giggling…. Detwiler getting out of a clown car…………(shrieks of raccoon laughter!!!)
cat daddy3000 - February 5, 2012
I’m ok with Wang in the ‘pen, truth be told, knowing that later in the year he’ll be a starter.
Whiter Mage - February 5, 2012
He has the same problem as Livo, takes forever to warm up
jeff550 - February 5, 2012
see Zimmermann's extra days of rest starts for a reason why not to put everyone on extra rest....
William.Hatheway - February 5, 2012
+1
cat daddy3000 - February 5, 2012
Except Zimmermann didn't pitch well on extra rest
jbg2772 - February 6, 2012
We really need another good OF, and more overall position player depth. Dump the extra SP's
If Bryce Harper doesn’t make the Nats roster out of opening day, we have to put Bernadina or Cameron in RF or CF. If this happens AND something else goes wrong (LaRoche doesn’t come back strong, there is an injury from any other player, someone goes in a bad slump, etc. etc.), boy are we screwed. That would most likely mean we have to put in Bernadina and Cameron in our starting lineup. Having those two would not put the Nationals in a position to have anything close to a playoff caliber lineup. Our 1-6 hitters are not good enough to cancel out these two players.
To me, we have to stop worrying about our rotation depth because even if we need someone other than these 7-8 quality MLB starters we already have, there are plenty of options. We could look to free agency or even our Minor League system in Solis, possibly Purke, and a bunch of other names. The issue with the outfield is that there are not a lot of options within the organization or outside of it. I would be happy to see the Nationals overpay for Bourjos because it would pain me to see two of Lannan, Wang, or Detwiler in the bullpen. If Gorzelanny is also in the pen, that gives us three SP’s taking up spots in the bullpen or in the minors while we don’t have any bench depth and possiblly an awful end of the batting order.
Also, if the Nats are a playoff caliber team come trade deadline time, there is no doubt that there will be plenty of serviceable starters up for grabs. Strasburg’s innings limit will not cause any SP depth-related problems.
Please read this, because I feel like I have some worthy points.
GetThatCurlyW - February 5, 2012
You do, but why create a hole you know you’ll have to fill later? I think Cameron’s serviceable, and I don’t think this is a crazy good playoff team yet.
Whiter Mage - February 5, 2012
I don’t necessarily think there will be a hole that we have to fill later, but it’s possible. But why should they make it very possible to have a less easily filled hole come opening day
Cameron batted something like .209 last year with little power.
Making the playoffs should be a goal this year. Besides, if we got Bourjos, that is a move they are also making for the future.
GetThatCurlyW - February 5, 2012
Were not getting Bourjos..........
that would be a big mistake on the part of the Angels………
artistfork - February 5, 2012
Well we did trade Capps to Minny and landed Ramos
But then again Capps was red hot and they were in desperate need of a closer. I think Bourjos is going to cost a lot and we probably don’t have the chips to cash in to get him but oh goodness would it be nice to have that kid.
I’d take him over Upton or Span for YEARS. Love to see a 1-9 of:
1. Bourjos – CF
2. Espinosa – 2B
3. Zimmerman – 3B
4. Morse – 1B
5. Harper – RF
6. Werth – LF
7. Ramos – C
8. Espinosa – SS
9. Pitcher
Eventually Harper swaps with Morse to have some nice L/R splits behind Zimm and eventually Danny moves to the eight hole when Rendon takes over at 2B and moves Danny to short. Only thing is Rendon has to be able to come back from injury AND we can’t move him as a PTBNL. Hood, Perez, or even Goodwin, although I wouldn’t let him go either, could be sent to LAA to try and pry Bourjos over here!
Mattionals - February 5, 2012
Espinosa is a beast if he's playing both 2B and SS.
I know nothing about Bourjos, and I’m holding out hope that maybe the Jays get plucky and move Rasmus.
Whiter Mage - February 5, 2012
Se7en starters.........
Is just all a part of the STRAS pitches in October plan…………:O)
artistfork - February 5, 2012
How?
How is there not a plan to keep Strasburg available in September (or October?) from day 1? We know that he’s capped at 160 innings. If management actually thinks a September playoff race is a possibility, then keeping Strasburg in the rotation in September must be a priority. Whether it’s giving him an extra day of rest or capping him at 4 innings/start until July (or not letting him start throwing until the end of March and keeping him in extended spring training through April), the front office can’t approach Strasburg’s season like they did Zimmermann’s last year.
If we don’t have a plan to keep Strasburg fresh then I don’t want to even consider pushing Harper to the majors this year. If he crushes AA and AAA pitching to the extent that his development would be slowed by leaving him in the minors, then he can come to the bigs.
Maybe the extra starter is part of a plan? I don’t know… but there are clearly 13 guys for 12 spots no matter how you slot them.
On another note, Lannan is not going to bring elite prospects. He’s only controlled through 2013 and he’s not cheap, so he’s not the type that a small market or non-contender team would target. He’s a very average WAR pitcher. Maybe you could pull Che Lin, but I just think the opportunity cost on a move like that is too high because Lin could get packaged with some other prospects for a pitcher who offers more than Lannan. Maybe the Red Sox are that desperate to fill out their starting rotation and need to make a move (and won’t get any love from the Rays). I can’t imagine Bourjos for Lannan. That would be a ludicrous steal. (And, by the way, I like Lannan… an average WAR lefty as a 5th starter is fantastic… but you can’t expect a lot back in trade value).
NatsFaninBama - February 5, 2012
extra rest hurts many pitchers' performances
and April games count as much as September ones, so I don’t get why you’d insist Stras screw with what SPs are taught to do just so his games came in one given month over another (and I don’t think there fringe playoff chances would be helped much if he only pitched four regular season months so he could theoretically pitch October… and then you’ll have to limit him further the next year because of how few innings he actually ended up throwing if — as is likely — they miss the playoffs.
William.Hatheway - February 5, 2012
The only reason extra rest hurts
Is because they’re not conditioned for it. You condition them for a 6 day rotation, they’ll be fine. College pitchers do a weekly rotation, no? And Strasburg was absolutely fine in college. The current system is not the be-all-end-all of baseball pitching – it’s just how it works best with the current roster constraints.
Whiter Mage - February 5, 2012
not sure
I’ll admit that I don’t know if saving innings for October is wise… but if they scheduled to keep him to 150 during the regular season and keep 10 innings in reserve for a potential postseason, but we were mostly out of it come September, it wouldn’t be too hard to stretch him out for those last 5 or 6 starts.
NatsFaninBama - February 5, 2012
October innings are not = to April innings..........
160=22 starts For STRAS………I don’t care how they do it……….Limiting his first half innings. A mystical stint on the DL will help…….At the allstar break move him to the 5th spot. This will give him basically two missed starts………Move the innings to 170 this will give him 24 starts……Schedule this to end on September 30th. If we make the playoffs, he risks his “life” for the city……….
Its completely defeatest to not have a plan to have STRAS not pitch the last day of the season.
artistfork - February 6, 2012
No it's not "defeatist"
It’s common sense. The Nats need his arm early in the season just as much as they need it late. If he lands on the DL for whatever reason, the team suffers, and there won’t be a playoff run.
And as to risking his
lifecareer for a playoff run? No thanks.RobBobS - February 6, 2012
Agreed & rec'd
What happens if you muck around w/Strasburg & the team opens the season 8-22? Goodbye, competitive season. Trying to set a plan for October by performing parlor tricks in April isn’t smart baseball, IMO.
Don’t get too far ahead of yourselves; Start the season with your top-5 SP’s & see how it plays out.
BinM - February 6, 2012
not in the middle
The one thing that’s really easy to rule out is shutting him down in the middle of the season (gratuitously… you can shut him down if he really gets hurt). That means wasting innings on rehab to get him back up to speed. Even if that’s 5 innings, that’s a whole start (and you’d like to give him 5 innings so he can get up to speed after being on the shelf for a month).
NatsFaninBama - February 7, 2012
Good point
but one that’s been made and ignored before…
jbg2772 - February 7, 2012
You're also assuming an inning is an inning
Correct me if I’m wrong, but gearing someone up to start a game and having him pitch 4 innings puts more than 50% wear on an arm than having them pitch 8. And continuously flipping pitchers from the pen back to starting and back to pen again can mess up their development (see Chamberlain on the Yanks). I know it’s not great for competing, but I’d rather see Strasberg just pitch until August 15 than have the organization mess with him. He’ll have a long career.
mk7676 - February 5, 2012
No
I’m not assuming anything. I pitched 3 possibilities… 1 gives him extra rest between starts, 1 gives him fewer innings per start, and 1 pushes his innings from May-October rather than April-August. You’re the one assuming that all innings aren’t equal. What you’re arguing makes some sense, but so does the logic that more damage is caused by warming up and cooling down between innings. So does the logic that inflamation caused by higher pitch counts per start is what hurts an arm. I don’t know which is right… you can have your theory, but I wouldn’t pretend that it’s a fact.
You can say that April games count as much as September games, and I get what you’re saying, but there are 2 flaws with that logic:
1. I’d say that it’s harder to win in April than September. The quality of play is better and the competition is more intense. That’s just a theory… I have nothing to back that up, but it does stand to reason that winning in April would at least be flukier because of less consistent play.
2. We play division opponents 26 times in our last 44 games and only 9 times in the first 43. Big difference.
NatsFaninBama - February 5, 2012
I don’t claim to know what exactly puts wear on pitchers’ arms. Might even vary from pitcher to pitcher. I’ve heard that pitchers throw a lot of pitches to gear up for a start, so that’s what I’m going on. Also, just going out there in the first place must put some wear on an arm to begin with. I admit that I know nothing, but I just can’t see how pitching 4 innings/start twice is the same as pitching 8 once. Add the fact that this has never been done before for this sort of thing…you get the idea.
I don’t think adding extra time between starts will work. Either you’re 1) skipping starts or 2) trying to put him on a 6 game rather than 5 game cycle. For 1), based on my limited baseball watching that never seems to work. For 2), Whiter Mage makes a point about how extra rest can work if it’s not really “extra,” but just what a pitcher does all year. But then you’re either a) going with a 6 man rotation, unnecessarily limiting everyone else’s starts, or b) pitching a different pitcher on 3 games rest every cycle (the guy that was previously ahead of Strasberg). I’m thinking about it in my ahead and the logistics of pitching one starter every 6 games and others every 5 is impossible.
Starting him a month late is a possibility. I’m not claiming April games count the same amount as September games if a team is competing. “Clutch” still counts. I just say no, and I don’t know why. Maybe because he should start the season with the team. Or because you can’t predict the future, anyway.
I’m glad you didn’t suggest pitching him out of the pen, then starting him, then pen, then starting again. I was a Yankee fan when Chamberlain came up. Yikes.
I don’t really share the belief that there’s a need to have him pitch into September. Rizzo is trying to build a team that will compete year after year. Strasberg is an important piece to that team, and I’d rather the Nats miss some games this year to guarantee he’s healthy in the future than take a chance for this year (where there are still holes and prospects who haven’t arrived yet) at the possible risk of future years.
mk7676 - February 5, 2012
so...
I guess I buried the lead in that post, but my main point is that if our primary goal is to make the playoffs this year, then certain moves make sense: ensuring Strasburg will be available in September, promoting Bryce Harper to the majors to start the season, and pushing to trade one of the starters, maybe Detwiler, who I suspect could get the most return, plus maybe some prospects, to pick up a quality OF ready to contribute more this year than Adam LaRoche (preferably a CF/leadoff hitter, but not necessarily).
If our primary goal is to win in the future (but also to be competitive this year, with the possibility of making the playoffs), then a contradictory set of personnel moves make sense: plan to shut down Strasburg in August. Let Harper prove himself in AA, and maybe even AAA before promoting him at 19. Hold onto our pitchers unless someone wows us with an offer, and possibly move Jackson at the trade deadline.
I’m not sure that pushing for the playoffs needs to be priority A this year… but I am willing to be convinced that’s the case. And I’m all for making moves “for today and for the future” but when the choice is between one or the other, we need to have a consistent priority. So when I read about Harper breaking camp in DC and hear chatter about trading Lannan for Byrd or a corner outfielder, those things indicate to me that we’re prioritizing winning now.
(Signing Edwin Jackson for a 1 year deal also suggests a win now philosophy, insofar as it will inhibit Detwiler’s development as a starter, but I guess that’s not necessarily the case, given that Jackson also could return prospects at the trade deadline or a 1st rounder in next June’s draft.)
NatsFaninBama - February 5, 2012
I think you’re right when you say it’s hard to get a lock on whether the team is looking to “compete” or “not really compete” next year. I think Rizzo is a bit confused as well lol. A lot will probably depend on whether the right move can be made for a CF before the season starts…I like that Rizzo isn’t panicking and overpaying for Upton/Span/Bourjos. Starting Werth in CF is NOT what you want if you’re “competing,” but better to stick to a plan for the future than ruin it with a hasty deal that sends long-term pieces for non-long-term solutions.
As for Strasburg, I know it’s going to suck to shut him down in August if the team is close, but there’s still something to be said about not sacrificing the tomorrow for today. Rob makes a good point in an above post that you don’t want to mess with his career because you’re making a run today (especially, if I may add, when your team is expected to get better in that future). I guess there are creative ways to ensure he can pitch into September, but let’s just keep it safe. He won’t. I’m fine with that.
mk7676 - February 6, 2012
STRAS' innings..........
Are harder then JZIMM’s innings……….Thats the point……….Have a plan……..Pitchers do not pitch until August 15th……….Thats defeatest……….
artistfork - February 6, 2012
it's not defeatist, it's weighing priorities
What if Znn was pushed and was re-injured? Same can be said about CJ Wilson.
mk7676 - February 6, 2012
Ankiel gets a minor league deal?
acomak:
Little #nats news before the big game: Per a source, the #nationals have signed Rick Ankiel to a minor league deal w/ST invite.
dc Roach - February 5, 2012
Yipee!!!
(read: ironic); ML deal is about right…. he got exposed anytime he was put in a full-time role.
William.Hatheway - February 5, 2012
but, those throws from the outfield....
cat daddy3000 - February 5, 2012
Good Move
They may need him.
HG_VA - February 5, 2012
As the unofficial president of the Rick Ankiel fan club, I approve of this deal.
The arm!
The vein!
Hurry up baseball!
(I hope all the Nats report to ST in as good a shape as Madonna!)
PerryMason - February 5, 2012
I love the Super Bowl...
it means baseball’s just around the corner.
RobBobS - February 5, 2012
wait, is that today?
dc Roach - February 5, 2012
The Super what now?
Patrick Reddington - February 5, 2012
football in February?..................when they start that?
I did watch highlights of all the Puppy Bowls last night after work in the wee hours……now that’s… …whoa!!!…….hamsters piloting airships?!?…………nothing ever good comes from that…
cat daddy3000 - February 5, 2012
Meh…..the Super Bowl doesn’t matter; neither of those teams had to play the Alabama Crimson Tide!
sullyzz - February 5, 2012
#rolltide
#idon’tevenknowwhatthatmeans
Patrick Reddington - February 5, 2012
Roll Damn Tide
NatsFaninBama - February 5, 2012
Rammer Jammer, Yellow Hammer, Give’em Hell Alabama!
sullyzz - February 5, 2012
just 2 weeks to p&c
I’m glad the Arm is back, he’s fun to watch
gengreen17 - February 5, 2012
"he's fun to watch"
Until he gets a bat in his hand.
RobBobS - February 5, 2012
Ankiel could accept a bench role ?
if he could be professional about it he does have some great D for late game substitutions ….
NewJerseyAveSE - February 5, 2012
NPUT...Quick notes on Ankiel...
Luckily, I brought my laptop to the Super Bowl party…
Patrick Reddington - February 5, 2012
Bourjos is a great option...
Listen, the Angels are loaded and have more young players than spots on their roster. They are very deep in both hitting and pitching. I’m sure the Angels would take Lannan and maybe one of our bullpen pitchers for Bourjos. I like that kid and he would be a good centerfielder for the Nats for many years. Peter Bourjos has speed and could be a leadoff option.. As he learns the ropes, he could hit some home runs….I like his upside.
hocke - February 5, 2012
So do they.
They’re not trading Bourjos.
RobBobS - February 5, 2012
Bourjos
Is a dream………..That mirror image fan someone in the world is dreaming of the NATS trading Harper………..LOL
artistfork - February 6, 2012
Just curious to know why they’d want Lannan and a bullpen guy if they’re deep in pitching
PerryMason - February 5, 2012
Angel Fan
Bourjos is coming off a 5.0 WAR season at the age of 24 (baseball-reference), isn’t eligible for arbitration until the 2014 season and will be a FA after the 2016 season. He is an incredibly valuable commodity. Lannan + B prospect or RP isn’t remotely credible as a trade offer — Reagins is gone.
Presuming Rendon hits in A ball this year and can stay healthy a Rendon/Bourjos swap is far closer in value, with some lower level prospects possibly being involved.
Cafardo has once again demonstrated his knowledge of baseball is incredibly deficient. How and why people take him seriously is beyond me. Seriously, any semi knowledgable fan would laugh at a Lannan/Bourjos swap.
YouthofToday - February 6, 2012
Except
Your team has zero leverage. You have a cluster blank with contracts in the of, DH, and at 1b and need to find a spot for trout. Why over pay for someone you are forced to move. We’ll wait for the call back.
Bsullivan - February 6, 2012
I think it is pretty obvious that Lannan for Bourjos is not reasonable.
I think Bourjos is generally overvalued, and will likely regress, but at the moment he is far more valuable than Lannan. If they wanted pitching the could probably swap Morales, Abreu, or Trumbo to Tampa Bay for Davis or Niemann. Besides, Hunter and Abreu’s contracts expire after this season, which would clear the logjam.
chubias - February 6, 2012
Forced to Move?
How are we forced to move Bourjos? It makes sense to leave Trout in AA or AAA until we gain the extra year of service (end of May I believe). It makes a lot more sense to then insert Trout in LF or RF depending on the performance of Vernon Wells or Hunter.
Also, I do believe we can trade Bourjos to 28 other teams. The Nationals don’t have leverage here.
YouthofToday - February 6, 2012
You aren't forced to move him. I retract that thought
But what on earth are the Angels going to do this year. You are almost forced to waste Trout down in AAA until 2013. May? There is no room for him in May. The only reason he can come up at the end of the season is because of the expanded rosters. If Wells contributes even a little bit, he has to play at 21 mil per season. Hunter is a leader and a vet, he’ll start.
Unless there is an injury, Trout’s stuck.
Bsullivan - February 6, 2012
Considering the Ages of Wells and Hunter...
there is a strong likelihood of injury.
By the end of May the team should have greater clarity on how Trout is performing in the minors and how Bourjos/Wells/Hunter are performing at the MLB level. As soon as the Halos gain the extra year of service time for Trout, and if DiPoto sees a 3+ win improvement by inserting Trout into the lineup, Trout will be in the everyday lineup.
Hunter asked Scioscia to move him to RF after he saw Bourjos play CF. Not only is Torii an fantastic media personality; he is an unselfish player. While I doubt he voluntarily takes himself out of the lineup I doubt he would be a clubhouse distraction if his role is reversed.
DiPoto has no stake in Wells performance. If he sucks he becomes a 4th OF.
This is a Nationals baseball board, so enough Halos talk here.
YouthofToday - February 6, 2012
The Angels would be silly to do this 1-1, or even close to that
Just because the Angels have three aging vets now doesn’t mean they should just give away one of their best young ones because someone else might be blocked for one year. Abreu and Hunter are in the last years of their contract. And there’s no rule against sitting a player making a lot of money, particularly someone like Hunter where he’s in his last year anyway. Why would the Angels just trade away Bourjos because Abreu and Hunter are on the roster for one more year? Makes no sense.
The Angels have “leverage” because they have something the Nats need and the Nats don’t have extra what the Angels need. There’s no real need to trade Bourjos because of Hunter and Abreu.
mk7676 - February 6, 2012
I'd never assumed it would be a 1-for-1 deal, though Mr. Cafardo obviously doesn't explore any possibilities...
I think the Nats have given up enough pitching prospects for now, would rather they waited for the 2013 FA class to find a CF…
Patrick Reddington - February 6, 2012
Ditto
jbg2772 - February 6, 2012
Bourjos is good
But I don’t think anyone believes he’s Rendon-good. “It Rendon can stay healthy”. That’s the one reason he wasn’t taken number one overall in the draft last year. If he actually is healthy, he’s worth worth plenty more than Bourjos — especially since Bourjos himself is having knee problems.
RobBobS - February 6, 2012
well be plenty happy if Rendon is a 5.0 War player
but i don’t think that particular trade makes any sense.
The angels have an interesting dilemma with all of their aging vets.
Bsullivan - February 6, 2012
I'm sure the Angels would be plenty happy if PB is a consistent 5.0 WAR player, too
We’ll see. I won’t make that pronouncement after one year (my guess is that he’ll typically be in the 3-4.5 range.)
RobBobS - February 6, 2012
Right
I think he is their best outfielder by far at this point.
Hunter is 36, Wells is awful, Abreu is only a DH player, and Morales is as uncertain as it comes. I think they’d be idiotic to trade their best OF. Wouldn’t you want your best OF and Trout. vs. trading your best OF to make room for Trout?
Bsullivan - February 6, 2012
There ARE 3 OF spots after all...
That wells contract is a doozy. .248 OBP. gawd
Bsullivan - February 6, 2012
Wells was truly awful this year, but he has a history of boom/bust years.
He went from .303/.357/.542 in 2006 to .245/.304/.402 in 2007. He rebounded the next year to .300/.343/.496, and was down again in 2009.
chubias - February 6, 2012
True,
his rebound in 2010 (.273/.331/.515) was better in some ways than 2008 (but not as good as 2006), but his bust in 2011 (.218/.248/.412) was of epic proportions. His 2011 BABIP (.214) was cover-your-eyes awful.
jbg2772 - February 6, 2012
Wells
Also had an insanely high pop-up percentage. He sucks, I’m not expecting much of a rebound.
I agree with the assertion Bourjos probably ends up averaging 4 WAR until he reaches FA. That presents nearly $40 million of in-the-money production before he even reaches arbitration.
YouthofToday - February 6, 2012
I think you are still overvaluing Bourjos, but as an Angels fan, you're pertfectly entitled to do so.
chubias - February 6, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Federal Baseball to post a comment.