Jump to content
Brewer Fanatic

The "How bad are the Nationals" thread


splitterpfj
Brewer Fanatic Contributor

For those keeping score, the Nats have handed their 1B job over to Dmitri Young, by default. Travis Lee requested his release, Nick Johnson is healing a broken leg.

 

Nook Logan would have been the Opening Day CF, but he has a groin injury, the new CF is Ryan Church, the new LF is coming straight from AA.

 

Honestly, how bad do you think this team will be this year? Most of their players seem to be spot fillers with no upside, and they're in a tough division.

 

I'll say they go 55-107.

 

What's your bet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I wonder how much that team suffered behind the scenes without true ownership. Don't they look like a team that may have a antied up for a major league payroll but skimped on player development and scouting? It looks like it's at the point where it will take a Breweresque five to six year rebuild from top to bottom before they will have a chance.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the short answer would be "historically bad."

 

You didn't even mention that Jason Simontacchi will be their #3 starter. Their rotation is going to end up being John Patterson and a bunch of guys who would be rotation fillers in AAA. I could see Patterson having a year like Ben Sheets had in '04 -- but that's assuming he stays healthy. If he goes down again, 120 losses wouldn't be out of the question for the Nats.

"[baseball]'s a stupid game sometimes." -- Ryan Braun

Twitter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Certainly, the Nats have no real starting pitching, however Kearns, Lopez, Nick Johnson, Zimmerman, and Church are solid players either in their prime or with room to improve. Plus, Escobar, and Snelling are interesting players that could still blossom into above average players.

 

With a potent lineup I can see them winning 68+ games, especially if they can deal Chad Cordero at the deadline for a young arm or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"We are going to do the best job we can," Bowden said. "We are going to have the best 25 men on Opening Day. There could be a trade between now and Opening Day, of which we have to have other things in place. So we are going to be flexible. We are going to be Tom Brady at the line of scrimmage between now and Opening Day."

 

Yeah... except Tom Brady doesn't suck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Jopal. I don't think they'll be as bad as some think.

 

I really like Church and Kearns, together with Johnson and Zimmerman they should be somewhat okay on offense. Pitching may be helped some by RFK, though they still will be really bad. I'd put the over under at 60, so I don't see them losing too many more than 100.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You almost have to TRY and lose more than 105 games. I'd say they win about 60 - 65.
"Dustin Pedroia doesn't have the strength or bat speed to hit major-league pitching consistently, and he has no power......He probably has a future as a backup infielder if he can stop rolling over to third base and shortstop." Keith Law, 2006
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of my college roomate is from DC, and we were just talking about this yesterday. He thinks that they can get to 60, but 50-55 seems more like a probable win total. I told him that this looks like the Clevland Indians of Major League. They should start scouring the California Penal League for some arms.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think they'll be as bad as some people think. Their offense could be decent. An outfield of Kearns, Church, and Snelling has some potential. Zimmerman is/will be a stud and Nick Johnson is underrated putting up a .948 ops last year but is often injured.

 

The word "horrible" is still too good to describe their pitching staff though. I think they could win close to 60 games, but they'll be on the wrong side of a blowout many times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You almost have to TRY and lose more than 105 games. I'd say they win about 60 - 65.

Agreed, though it take a lot to get from 60-80, it doesn't take much talent at all to get those first 60 wins. Other teams get worn down, you face spot starters like the Sheets/Ohka replacements, and without incredibly bad luck, you win no less than 55-60 games.

 

The 32-130 mark is laughable. Seriously, even fringe major league talent simply isn't that weak. This isn't a small sample like the NFL where the same winning percentage is completely feasible.

Even the Brewers scrap-heap lineup of

CF: Gross

RF: Nix

LF: Mench

2B: Counsell

1B: Rottino

SS: Ozzie Chavez

C: Closser

3B: Graffanino

With our AAA/AA pitching staff would have to have some bad breaks to finish 32-130.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lopez is a solid hitter, Zimmerman's a fine player, Kearns is solid, and Johnson is good, but man. Nowhere in any analysis of their position players is there anything to offset their complete abyss of pitching.

 

50 wins. That should be close to accurate.

Stearns Brewing Co.: Sustainability from farm to plate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund
The Brewer Fanatic Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premiere Brewers community on the internet. Included with caretaking is ad-free browsing of Brewer Fanatic.

×
×
  • Create New...