By now, you know the drill. Read up on all of the previous "Maybe Next Year" posts here.
Tonight's edition is the bench. Keep in mind that the bench predicted is done assuming the starting lineup is how I set it here and also assuming the pitching staff consists of 5 starters and 7 relievers, leaving us with 5 bench players on a normal basis. Due to the extreme right-handedness of my lineup (Guzman, a switch hitter, and Dunn, a left handed hitter, were the only two non-righties in my lineup), the bench will consist of 3 lefties and two righties. This really only made a difference in my final pick, which I'll talk about more later. I'll withold 2009 predictions for these guys, as it's kinda silly to predict them considering I did the starters' predictions based on about a full season of play.
R/R Luke Montz-C/1B (no ML contract yet, will cost $400k or less in '09)
At first I had Nieves, but why not Montz? The kid hit .282/.368/.536 to start the year in Harrisburg and has hit .260/.328/.462 in AA and above in his career, to go with 42 XBH's in 407 at bats. As long as the walks continue to rise and the K's continue to fall, Montz will be a servicable backup catcher and first baseman.
L/L Nick Johnson-1B (under contract, $5.5 mil in '09)
We all know what we get with Nicky J: a metric ton of walks, decent power, great defense and multiple trips to the DL. When Nick The Stick (or Slick Nick) is on the DL, I suppose Leonard Davis, Justin Maxwell or Mike Daniel get their chances to prove themselves (Casto will play more 1B then). Side note: Nick Johnson stole 16 bases in A ball? WAT?
R/R Wily Mo Pena-OF (option-$5 mil for the Nats to pick up, $2 mil for Pena to pick up, $2 mil likely)
Do we have to keep him? Unfortunately, yes. We'll decline our part of the option (if for some reason we accept, I'll go bezerk), but Pena will undoubtedly pick up his part, as $2 mil is a nice bounty for a pathetic 35 OPS+ (Odalis Perez has a 38 OPS+ this year). Pena gets $1 mil for each HR he has hit. Meh. Maybe next year he'll return to the Wily Mo we hoped we would get, the one who put up OPS+ above 100 from 2004-06 (and with the Nats in 37 games last year). Maybe he'll get back on track with his "top comparables" on Baseball-Reference.com (Cory Snyder, Austin Kearns, Phil Plantier, Albert Belle, Mike Marshall, Jermaine Dye, Frank Thomas, Preston Wilson, George Bell and Willie Stargell round out the top 10). I'd say expect more homers, continued poor defense and a different '10 uniform in Wily Mo's future.
L/R Willie Harris-2B/3B/SS/OF (resigned, $1 mil for 1 year)
Willie's a pretty big no-brainer. He's got speed, plays plenty of positions, and has been a decent player this year. He's still only at .221/.335/.379 over the year, but he has hit .273/.385/.429 since June 1. In terms of contract estimation, we'll just say Harris receives a $200k raise over his 2008 salary to make it an even $1 mil.
L/R Kory Casto-1B/3B/OF (under contract, $400k auto-renew likely)
Kory barely edged out Leonard Davis in my book, but his left-handedness and experience gives him the edge here. He plays above-average defense at 4 positions (1B/3B/LF/RF). He hasn't swung the bat great overall, but is hitting .294/.368/.412 in July. I would be very happy with that production over a full season. I'd expect more along the lines of .280/.340/.400 though. And after seeing Ryan Langerhans for most of 2007, I would still be very happy with that.
The odd men out: Leonard Davis, Justin Maxwell and Mike Daniel (lack of high-level experience), Ryan Langerhans, Wil Nieves and Peterson T. Orr (lack of success in the Majors, low-ceiling) and (needs to start wherever he is).
Total Bench Cost: $9.6 mil (estimate), most of which goes to Johnson at $5.5 mil.
Check in tomorrow for Maybe Next Year? Part Six: The Bullpen!
Showing posts with label Maybe Next Year. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Maybe Next Year. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Monday, July 14, 2008
Maybe Next Year? Part Four: The Pitching Rotation
Hopefully by now, you've read parts one, two and three.
Once again, what I'm trying to show all of you is that 1) The Nationals could (theoretically) be a .500 team next year and 2) They don't have to spend a whole lot of money to do it. They just have to spend that money in the right way. Responsibly. I'd like to point out again that I get all contract information from Cot's Baseball Contracts. It's crazy in-depth, accurate and (better yet), incredibly user friendly.
Without further ado, your 2009 Washington Nationals' pitching staff:
STARTING ROTATION
1) RHP Tim Redding (arbitration-eligible, ~$2 mil)
Redding is the "ace" of the Nats' staff filled with #3/4 pitchers. In 198 and 2/3 innings pitched for the Nats in 2007-08, Redding sports a 3.76 ERA and a 10-9 record. 11 of his 20 starts this year have been quality starts, but he's allowed 4 earned runs or fewer in all but 2 of his starts (and 3 or fewer in all but 5). The Nats are 15-5 in his starts. In reality, a team's "ace" is the guy who, when he pitches, gives the team the best chance to win. It's a tossup between Redding and Lannan in that category, but you can't really argue with W's. I know John Lannan gets 2.75 fewer runs per game in run support, but a 15-5 team record when Redding starts (compared with a 21-55 record in games he doesn't start) is pretty impressive.
Realistic 2009 prediction: 12-9, 32 GS, 183 IP, 3.68 ERA, 70BB/120K
2) LHP John Lannan (under contract, $400k auto-renew likely)
Lannan is intriguing. He doesn't strike out many batters (4.41 K/9 for his career, 5.01 K/9 this season) and allows a decent number of baserunners (career WHIP of 1.344, 1.283 this year), yet still puts up decent numbers in terms of ERA (4.15 career ERA, 3.40 this year) and ERA+ (118 career ERA+, 125 this year). He doesn't throw particularly hard. But why bother arguing against results? The kid has the intangibles to pitch in the majors. He keeps the ball in the yard and goes out and gives you a quality start most times he's out there (13 of 18 starts this year were 6 innings or more with 3 earned runs or less). And somehow the Nats are still only 5-13 in games started by the 23-year-old lefty. Meh.
Realistic 2009 prediction: 8-12, 33 GS, 185 IP, 3.90 ERA, 65BB/95K
3) RHP Jason Bergmann (under contract, $400k auto-renew likely)
Bergmann is about as intriguing as Lannan (to me, at least). Here's a guy who only started 21 of his 104 games in A+ or above (11 of which came in 2007-08, after reaching the big leagues). It appears that his time as a reliever stunted his endurance, as he falls apart after the 5th inning, with about a 90 OPS+ allowed over innings 1-5 (with 100 being a league-average pitcher) as opposed to about a 143 OPS+ allowed during innings 6-8 (which is probably better-sounding than what it really is, considering these are career numbers and include games he came in as a reliever). If we can get the Mann on a better strength and conditioning plan that allows him to pitch 6 effective innings each game rather than 5, we have ourselves another Tim Redding, just with better K/9 numbers (7.19 K/9 as opposed to Redding's 6.11). Here's to some more (and improved) BERGMANNIA in 2009! He's my breakout candidate.
Realistic 2009 prediction: 15-7, 33 GS, 197 IP, 3.42 ERA, 50BB/160K
4) LHP Oliver Perez (FA signing, $5 mil for 1 year)
Why not replace one lefthanded starter named O. Perez with a younger one? Oliver is equally intriguing (time to invest in a thesaurus, no?) as Bergmann and Lannan but has hit both peaks (2.98 ERA and 239 K in 196 innings pitched in 2004) and pits (6.55 ERA in 112 and 2/3 innings pitched in 2006) in his career already. Why is he worth picking up? He is having a season this year that looks average at best on paper (6-5 for a good team, 4.44 ERA) but also looks like an abberation if you search deeper. Perez's H/9 is actually better this year (7.58) than his career average (8.08) and last year's (7.78). He's just been a little wild, with career highs in HBP and WP at the ASB, and a little unlucky. His K's are a little bit down and his walks are a little bit up, but those things are correctable. This guy's got sick talent and is just going to be 27 at the beginning of next year. Guarantee him some money and innings and let him try and rebuild himself for a year under a new pitching coach. What's there to lose?
Realistic 2009 prediction: 13-8, 33 GS, 194 IP, 3.57 ERA, 85BB/205K
5) RHP Collin Balester (under contract, $400k auto-renew likely)
Balester has the most talent in the system. We've seen flashes of it in the first 3 games, with a 100% ridiculous line of .154/.185/.154 against the first time through the lineup (comparable to Tim Redding's career hitting line of .145/.168/.173). But, unfortunately, baseball games are 9 innings rather than 6. And Balester allows a .387/.487/.710 line against during innints 4-6 (semi-comparable to Sammy Sosa's 64 HR 2001 season, where he hit .328/.437/.737). The sample size is small (3 games and 73 career batters faced), but Balester needs to be efficient later on in games next year just like Bergmann.
Realistic 2009 prediction: 6-8, 22 GS, 130 IP, 4.19 ERA, 45BB/100K
So there you have it...our $9.2 mil starting rotation (even less if Oliver isn't signed and the rotation spot goes to Shairon Martis, Tyler Clippard, Garrett Mock, etc.). Under my predictions, the staff will go 54-44 with about a 3.72 ERA. Wouldn't be too bad...hopefully the likes of those guys I just named above could fill in the extra 9 or so starts. Keep in mind that these predictions are based most on performance and not injury.
Be sure to check in tomorrow night for the bench, Tuesday night for the bullpen and sometime later this week with the wrapup of the series.
Once again, what I'm trying to show all of you is that 1) The Nationals could (theoretically) be a .500 team next year and 2) They don't have to spend a whole lot of money to do it. They just have to spend that money in the right way. Responsibly. I'd like to point out again that I get all contract information from Cot's Baseball Contracts. It's crazy in-depth, accurate and (better yet), incredibly user friendly.
Without further ado, your 2009 Washington Nationals' pitching staff:
STARTING ROTATION
1) RHP Tim Redding (arbitration-eligible, ~$2 mil)
Redding is the "ace" of the Nats' staff filled with #3/4 pitchers. In 198 and 2/3 innings pitched for the Nats in 2007-08, Redding sports a 3.76 ERA and a 10-9 record. 11 of his 20 starts this year have been quality starts, but he's allowed 4 earned runs or fewer in all but 2 of his starts (and 3 or fewer in all but 5). The Nats are 15-5 in his starts. In reality, a team's "ace" is the guy who, when he pitches, gives the team the best chance to win. It's a tossup between Redding and Lannan in that category, but you can't really argue with W's. I know John Lannan gets 2.75 fewer runs per game in run support, but a 15-5 team record when Redding starts (compared with a 21-55 record in games he doesn't start) is pretty impressive.
Realistic 2009 prediction: 12-9, 32 GS, 183 IP, 3.68 ERA, 70BB/120K
2) LHP John Lannan (under contract, $400k auto-renew likely)
Lannan is intriguing. He doesn't strike out many batters (4.41 K/9 for his career, 5.01 K/9 this season) and allows a decent number of baserunners (career WHIP of 1.344, 1.283 this year), yet still puts up decent numbers in terms of ERA (4.15 career ERA, 3.40 this year) and ERA+ (118 career ERA+, 125 this year). He doesn't throw particularly hard. But why bother arguing against results? The kid has the intangibles to pitch in the majors. He keeps the ball in the yard and goes out and gives you a quality start most times he's out there (13 of 18 starts this year were 6 innings or more with 3 earned runs or less). And somehow the Nats are still only 5-13 in games started by the 23-year-old lefty. Meh.
Realistic 2009 prediction: 8-12, 33 GS, 185 IP, 3.90 ERA, 65BB/95K
3) RHP Jason Bergmann (under contract, $400k auto-renew likely)
Bergmann is about as intriguing as Lannan (to me, at least). Here's a guy who only started 21 of his 104 games in A+ or above (11 of which came in 2007-08, after reaching the big leagues). It appears that his time as a reliever stunted his endurance, as he falls apart after the 5th inning, with about a 90 OPS+ allowed over innings 1-5 (with 100 being a league-average pitcher) as opposed to about a 143 OPS+ allowed during innings 6-8 (which is probably better-sounding than what it really is, considering these are career numbers and include games he came in as a reliever). If we can get the Mann on a better strength and conditioning plan that allows him to pitch 6 effective innings each game rather than 5, we have ourselves another Tim Redding, just with better K/9 numbers (7.19 K/9 as opposed to Redding's 6.11). Here's to some more (and improved) BERGMANNIA in 2009! He's my breakout candidate.
Realistic 2009 prediction: 15-7, 33 GS, 197 IP, 3.42 ERA, 50BB/160K
4) LHP Oliver Perez (FA signing, $5 mil for 1 year)
Why not replace one lefthanded starter named O. Perez with a younger one? Oliver is equally intriguing (time to invest in a thesaurus, no?) as Bergmann and Lannan but has hit both peaks (2.98 ERA and 239 K in 196 innings pitched in 2004) and pits (6.55 ERA in 112 and 2/3 innings pitched in 2006) in his career already. Why is he worth picking up? He is having a season this year that looks average at best on paper (6-5 for a good team, 4.44 ERA) but also looks like an abberation if you search deeper. Perez's H/9 is actually better this year (7.58) than his career average (8.08) and last year's (7.78). He's just been a little wild, with career highs in HBP and WP at the ASB, and a little unlucky. His K's are a little bit down and his walks are a little bit up, but those things are correctable. This guy's got sick talent and is just going to be 27 at the beginning of next year. Guarantee him some money and innings and let him try and rebuild himself for a year under a new pitching coach. What's there to lose?
Realistic 2009 prediction: 13-8, 33 GS, 194 IP, 3.57 ERA, 85BB/205K
5) RHP Collin Balester (under contract, $400k auto-renew likely)
Balester has the most talent in the system. We've seen flashes of it in the first 3 games, with a 100% ridiculous line of .154/.185/.154 against the first time through the lineup (comparable to Tim Redding's career hitting line of .145/.168/.173). But, unfortunately, baseball games are 9 innings rather than 6. And Balester allows a .387/.487/.710 line against during innints 4-6 (semi-comparable to Sammy Sosa's 64 HR 2001 season, where he hit .328/.437/.737). The sample size is small (3 games and 73 career batters faced), but Balester needs to be efficient later on in games next year just like Bergmann.
Realistic 2009 prediction: 6-8, 22 GS, 130 IP, 4.19 ERA, 45BB/100K
So there you have it...our $9.2 mil starting rotation (even less if Oliver isn't signed and the rotation spot goes to Shairon Martis, Tyler Clippard, Garrett Mock, etc.). Under my predictions, the staff will go 54-44 with about a 3.72 ERA. Wouldn't be too bad...hopefully the likes of those guys I just named above could fill in the extra 9 or so starts. Keep in mind that these predictions are based most on performance and not injury.
Be sure to check in tomorrow night for the bench, Tuesday night for the bullpen and sometime later this week with the wrapup of the series.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Maybe Next Year? Part Three: the Starting Lineup
Hopefully by now, you've read parts one and two. Basically those set the groundwork for tonight. What I'm trying to show all of you is 1) The Nationals could (theoretically) be a .500 team next year and 2) They don't have to spend a whole lot of money to do it. Yes, Uncle Stan and whoever the new GM is are going to shell out some green. They can probably do it without raising the payroll a huge bit. All they need to do is spend the money RESPONSIBLY-no stupid Paul Lo Duca, Rob Mackowiak or Johnny Estrada signings.
I'd like to point out before I go any further that I get all contract information from Cot's Baseball Contracts. It's crazy in-depth, accurate and (better yet), incredibly user friendly.
I'm not going to waste a whole lot of space on the Nats' contractual obligations for next year. I will, however, link you to another spreadsheet I made. It profiles all Nats 40-man guys and their contracts for next year. So here it is.
If my calculations are correct (some are bound to be off by a little bit, but I doubt many are off by much...if they are, leave corrections in comments), the Nats have $40.7 mil tied up for 2009 in contracts for 31 players (under the assumption that all guys under team control that haven't hit arbitration yet are auto-renewed and all guys eligible for arbitration are offered, minus Colome, so it's likely to be even less than that).
The Nats' opening day payroll in 2008 is a few dollars (well, $39 thousand dollars is a few dollars to the Lerners) short of $55 mil. Even a $5-10 mil raise in payroll (don't be cheap, Lerners) would give Kasten and Bowden's replacement roughly $19 mil-$24 mil to play with. That's a lot of money, maybe even enough to feed Latrell Sprewell's family. Let's see what we can do with that extra cash. I'll go over the starting lineup tonight, the pitching staff tomorrow night and the bench Saturday night.
Without further ado, your 2009 Washington Nationals' starting lineup!
1) Cristian Guzman, SS (resigned, $7 mil per year over 2 years)
Guzman is the shortstop most likely to give the Nats their most bang for their buck, as he won't cost the 8 digits per year that Furcal will and will (hopefully) take a small hometown discount (because we payed for a whole lot of nothin' from 2005-07).
Realistic 2009 prediction: .305/.335/.425, 8 SB, 8 HR, 90 R, 55 RBI
2) Mark Ellis, 2B (FA signing, $5.5 mil per year over 2 years)
Performance-wise, I'd rather have Orlando Hudson, but we all know the Lerners are too cheap for him. So I'll settle with Ellis, formerly of the Oakland A's. He would fit very well in the #2 hole (career OPS+ of 100, meaning he's exactly league-average hitting-wise, but with more BB than K this year, he obviously can handle the bat well enough for the 2 hole) and is a great fielder. The only knock in this plan is that he and the Athletics are currently talking extension. Let's hope he slips out of Billy Beane's hands.
Realistic 2009 prediction: .275/.340/.420, 10 SB, 12 HR, 90 R, 65 RBI
3) Ryan Zimmerman, 3B (arbitration-eligble, ~$5 mil for 2009)
We all know Zimmerman's abilities. He is the king of the walkoff, has a large ownership in Web Gems and always seems to be the guy to get a key hit when you need one. The question: is he going to be 100% healthy next year? I'm leaning yes. For now. It will be fun to see him have the breakout year everyone thought he would have this year.
Realistic 2009 prediction: .290/.350/.490, 5 SB, 28 HR, 95 R, 105 RBI
4) Adam Dunn, 1B (FA signing, $14 mil for 1 year).
Dunn is a three-true-outcomes hitter (meaning he usually homers, strikes out or walks). I'm perfectly content with him hitting cleanup. You know what you're going to get: 40 HR, 100 RBI, 100 BB, 180 K. He's not a 1B by trade, but has spent significant time there over his career (remember, Dmitri started as an OF also). Speaking of Da Meat Hook, Dunn can't be as bad fielding-wise as him, so it's an improvement across the board. I am suggesting a Dunn signing because he'll come relatively cheap compared to his true production (don't let the .250ish batting average fool you, he's quite a threat in the lineup). His power shouldn't decline a whole lot outside of the Great American Ballpark (look at his Home/Away splits here. His OPS may be 51 points lower on the road in his career, but .866 still ain't bad. And he ain't Garrett Atkins). I am also suggesting signing Dunn because Johnson is inevitably going to be hurt and I've got a gut feeling* Da Meat Hook is gone by the deadline (*as opposed to Ray King's Gut Feeling, my favorite Nationals Journal username).
Realistic 2009 prediction: .250/.380/.525, 5 SB, 40 HR, 105 R, 125 RBI
5) Austin Kearns, RF (under contract, $8 mil)
I don't think it's much of a secret that I'm a big Austin Kearns fan. I can't stand but like the guy who can best pull off overalls and a John Deere trucker hat. I also can't stand but like his defensive abilities or his ability to get on base. One thing to watch out for: if the Nats sign Adam Dunn, they've brought in Kearns' best friend. I don't know if that could work out any better for the morale of the two guys, and I have a feeling it would positively influence the performance of both.
Realistic 2009 prediction: .270/.360/.470, 5 SB, 25 HR, 85 R, 95 RBI
6) Elijah Dukes, LF (under contract, $400k auto-renew likely)
Dukes has surprised me a lot this year in ways I didn't expect. It seems as if he was telling the truth when he talked about being closer to a model citizen now that he got away from some of his bad friends from his hometown (my words). There's no doubt in my mind that Dukes will be a solid performer in 2009. He's proved to me that he's not only worth a spot on the 25-man roster, but a spot in the starting lineup. This is what I least expected: now, when I hear the name Elijah Dukes, "great ballplayer" comes to mind before "bad person." A lot can happen in a year, and it certainly doesn't come close to erasing the turmoil of his past, but he's taken giant steps and instilled confidence in both Nats fans and himself.
Realistic 2009 prediction: .270/.370/.460, 25 SB, 20 HR, 80 R, 80 RBI
7) Jesus Flores, C (under contract, $400k auto-renew likely)
I'm going to be straight-up with you right here: I'm not confident that Flores can handle hitting above 6th over a full season-yet. He's a little too streaky at this point and looks foolish at times. That being said, he's STILL an above-average catcher both behind the plate and at it. I think wedging him between Dukes and L-Millz would be a good situation for him.
Realistic 2009 prediction: .265/.325/.445, 1 SB, 15 HR, 55 R, 75 RBI
8) Lastings Milledge, CF (under contract, $400k auto-renew likely)
As good as Lastings looked this year, he still only hit .245/.312/.368, a far cry from last year's line of .272/.341/.446. I think he's somewhere in the middle, and is also a developing center fielder. I don't see why we shouldn't write "8" beside him on both sides (the lineup and the fielding arrangements) next year and see what he can do. If he gets hurt again, or plays bad, Dukes is probably a better CF at this point anyways. Stick him there and someone else in LF if needed.
Realistic 2009 prediction: .265/.335/.435, 25 SB, 15 HR, 65 R, 65 RBI
These 8 guys under my "realistic 2009 predictions" would score 665 runs (and account for 665 RBI, coincidentally). The 2008 Washington Nationals are on pace for 583 runs as an entire team (which wouldn't include bench players). Now, my predictions all won't come true (and injuries do happen...but we all know that), but that would be a significant improvement, wouldn't you think? And on the whole, the lineup would cost the difference between Guzman's 2008 and 2009 salaries (roughly $3 mil), the difference between Kearns' 2008 and 2009 salaries (roughly $3 mil), the difference between Lopez' 2008 salary and Ellis' 2009 salary (roughly $300k) and the difference between Young's 2008 salary and Dunn's 2009 salary (roughly $9 mil). So a little more than $15 mil could improve the starting lineup to the point that it would score 82 runs more than this year's entire team combined (including the bench and pitchers)...and my runs/RBI predictions were made more on player career averages/highs than the players playing around them (so they may be a little bit low in the cases of Guzman, Ellis, Dukes, Flores and Milledge). Is that $15 mil worth it to you? Account for around 100 more runs between all bench players and pitchers and you're looking at an offense that scores 765 runs. That equates to 4.72 a game, which would 6th out of 16 in the league this year. Combine that with a bullpen that is improved a little bit, and the Nats could break even on runs next year (will go further into depth there tomorrow).
But it's your turn. What do you think about my plans? It's all easier said than done, but these days, money talks louder than most other factors. Time to pull out your checkbooks, Lerner family.
I'd like to point out before I go any further that I get all contract information from Cot's Baseball Contracts. It's crazy in-depth, accurate and (better yet), incredibly user friendly.
I'm not going to waste a whole lot of space on the Nats' contractual obligations for next year. I will, however, link you to another spreadsheet I made. It profiles all Nats 40-man guys and their contracts for next year. So here it is.
If my calculations are correct (some are bound to be off by a little bit, but I doubt many are off by much...if they are, leave corrections in comments), the Nats have $40.7 mil tied up for 2009 in contracts for 31 players (under the assumption that all guys under team control that haven't hit arbitration yet are auto-renewed and all guys eligible for arbitration are offered, minus Colome, so it's likely to be even less than that).
The Nats' opening day payroll in 2008 is a few dollars (well, $39 thousand dollars is a few dollars to the Lerners) short of $55 mil. Even a $5-10 mil raise in payroll (don't be cheap, Lerners) would give Kasten and Bowden's replacement roughly $19 mil-$24 mil to play with. That's a lot of money, maybe even enough to feed Latrell Sprewell's family. Let's see what we can do with that extra cash. I'll go over the starting lineup tonight, the pitching staff tomorrow night and the bench Saturday night.
Without further ado, your 2009 Washington Nationals' starting lineup!
1) Cristian Guzman, SS (resigned, $7 mil per year over 2 years)
Guzman is the shortstop most likely to give the Nats their most bang for their buck, as he won't cost the 8 digits per year that Furcal will and will (hopefully) take a small hometown discount (because we payed for a whole lot of nothin' from 2005-07).
Realistic 2009 prediction: .305/.335/.425, 8 SB, 8 HR, 90 R, 55 RBI
2) Mark Ellis, 2B (FA signing, $5.5 mil per year over 2 years)
Performance-wise, I'd rather have Orlando Hudson, but we all know the Lerners are too cheap for him. So I'll settle with Ellis, formerly of the Oakland A's. He would fit very well in the #2 hole (career OPS+ of 100, meaning he's exactly league-average hitting-wise, but with more BB than K this year, he obviously can handle the bat well enough for the 2 hole) and is a great fielder. The only knock in this plan is that he and the Athletics are currently talking extension. Let's hope he slips out of Billy Beane's hands.
Realistic 2009 prediction: .275/.340/.420, 10 SB, 12 HR, 90 R, 65 RBI
3) Ryan Zimmerman, 3B (arbitration-eligble, ~$5 mil for 2009)
We all know Zimmerman's abilities. He is the king of the walkoff, has a large ownership in Web Gems and always seems to be the guy to get a key hit when you need one. The question: is he going to be 100% healthy next year? I'm leaning yes. For now. It will be fun to see him have the breakout year everyone thought he would have this year.
Realistic 2009 prediction: .290/.350/.490, 5 SB, 28 HR, 95 R, 105 RBI
4) Adam Dunn, 1B (FA signing, $14 mil for 1 year).
Dunn is a three-true-outcomes hitter (meaning he usually homers, strikes out or walks). I'm perfectly content with him hitting cleanup. You know what you're going to get: 40 HR, 100 RBI, 100 BB, 180 K. He's not a 1B by trade, but has spent significant time there over his career (remember, Dmitri started as an OF also). Speaking of Da Meat Hook, Dunn can't be as bad fielding-wise as him, so it's an improvement across the board. I am suggesting a Dunn signing because he'll come relatively cheap compared to his true production (don't let the .250ish batting average fool you, he's quite a threat in the lineup). His power shouldn't decline a whole lot outside of the Great American Ballpark (look at his Home/Away splits here. His OPS may be 51 points lower on the road in his career, but .866 still ain't bad. And he ain't Garrett Atkins). I am also suggesting signing Dunn because Johnson is inevitably going to be hurt and I've got a gut feeling* Da Meat Hook is gone by the deadline (*as opposed to Ray King's Gut Feeling, my favorite Nationals Journal username).
Realistic 2009 prediction: .250/.380/.525, 5 SB, 40 HR, 105 R, 125 RBI
5) Austin Kearns, RF (under contract, $8 mil)
I don't think it's much of a secret that I'm a big Austin Kearns fan. I can't stand but like the guy who can best pull off overalls and a John Deere trucker hat. I also can't stand but like his defensive abilities or his ability to get on base. One thing to watch out for: if the Nats sign Adam Dunn, they've brought in Kearns' best friend. I don't know if that could work out any better for the morale of the two guys, and I have a feeling it would positively influence the performance of both.
Realistic 2009 prediction: .270/.360/.470, 5 SB, 25 HR, 85 R, 95 RBI
6) Elijah Dukes, LF (under contract, $400k auto-renew likely)
Dukes has surprised me a lot this year in ways I didn't expect. It seems as if he was telling the truth when he talked about being closer to a model citizen now that he got away from some of his bad friends from his hometown (my words). There's no doubt in my mind that Dukes will be a solid performer in 2009. He's proved to me that he's not only worth a spot on the 25-man roster, but a spot in the starting lineup. This is what I least expected: now, when I hear the name Elijah Dukes, "great ballplayer" comes to mind before "bad person." A lot can happen in a year, and it certainly doesn't come close to erasing the turmoil of his past, but he's taken giant steps and instilled confidence in both Nats fans and himself.
Realistic 2009 prediction: .270/.370/.460, 25 SB, 20 HR, 80 R, 80 RBI
7) Jesus Flores, C (under contract, $400k auto-renew likely)
I'm going to be straight-up with you right here: I'm not confident that Flores can handle hitting above 6th over a full season-yet. He's a little too streaky at this point and looks foolish at times. That being said, he's STILL an above-average catcher both behind the plate and at it. I think wedging him between Dukes and L-Millz would be a good situation for him.
Realistic 2009 prediction: .265/.325/.445, 1 SB, 15 HR, 55 R, 75 RBI
8) Lastings Milledge, CF (under contract, $400k auto-renew likely)
As good as Lastings looked this year, he still only hit .245/.312/.368, a far cry from last year's line of .272/.341/.446. I think he's somewhere in the middle, and is also a developing center fielder. I don't see why we shouldn't write "8" beside him on both sides (the lineup and the fielding arrangements) next year and see what he can do. If he gets hurt again, or plays bad, Dukes is probably a better CF at this point anyways. Stick him there and someone else in LF if needed.
Realistic 2009 prediction: .265/.335/.435, 25 SB, 15 HR, 65 R, 65 RBI
These 8 guys under my "realistic 2009 predictions" would score 665 runs (and account for 665 RBI, coincidentally). The 2008 Washington Nationals are on pace for 583 runs as an entire team (which wouldn't include bench players). Now, my predictions all won't come true (and injuries do happen...but we all know that), but that would be a significant improvement, wouldn't you think? And on the whole, the lineup would cost the difference between Guzman's 2008 and 2009 salaries (roughly $3 mil), the difference between Kearns' 2008 and 2009 salaries (roughly $3 mil), the difference between Lopez' 2008 salary and Ellis' 2009 salary (roughly $300k) and the difference between Young's 2008 salary and Dunn's 2009 salary (roughly $9 mil). So a little more than $15 mil could improve the starting lineup to the point that it would score 82 runs more than this year's entire team combined (including the bench and pitchers)...and my runs/RBI predictions were made more on player career averages/highs than the players playing around them (so they may be a little bit low in the cases of Guzman, Ellis, Dukes, Flores and Milledge). Is that $15 mil worth it to you? Account for around 100 more runs between all bench players and pitchers and you're looking at an offense that scores 765 runs. That equates to 4.72 a game, which would 6th out of 16 in the league this year. Combine that with a bullpen that is improved a little bit, and the Nats could break even on runs next year (will go further into depth there tomorrow).
But it's your turn. What do you think about my plans? It's all easier said than done, but these days, money talks louder than most other factors. Time to pull out your checkbooks, Lerner family.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Maybe Next Year? Part Two
Yesterday I went over some moves I think the Nats would be wise to make this coming offseason in order to take a step towards (and perhaps over) .500 next year.
Last night's post was some of the "who," but tonight's post is the rest of the "who" and some of the "what," where I'll (crudely) project the names and prices of the roster for next year. Guys like Texeira, Hudson, Furcal and K-Rod likely price themselves out of the Nats' range, but maybe Uncle Teddy will surprise us (probably not).
To do this, I made a beautiful spreadsheet using Google Documents:
As you can (hopefully) tell, I have no idea how to make it show up right on the blog. I'll just direct you to the link where you can look (and sort!). You can see my spreadsheet here.
I'd like to point out 10 "set in stone" players for next year. "Set in stone" does not mean "untouchable" or anything along those lines. Instead it's guys who I can't imagine the Nationals trading and guys who are basically are guaranteed a spot on next year's team and the Nats meanwhile have no reason to trade them (either due to a small contract, or even a large, unmovable contract). Thus, "set in stone" is not necessarily a good thing. The ten players I named: Flores, Zimmerman, Dukes, Milledge, Kearns, Lannan, Bergmann, Balester, Rivera, Hanrahan. I'd say there is a 99.9% chance all 10 of those players are on the Nationals' opening day roster next year (barring injury, of course).
Tomorrow night I'll go through my personal projections, for both the 25 and 40-man rosters. They will include (again, crude) statistical projections for the players on both rosters. I'll also include in the post what I figure the Nationals will do with the players that are on the roster now that I don't project to be there next year. Hopefully by then, I'll figure out how to make stuff from Google Docs able to show up in a blog entry (has to be converted to a picture as far as I know).
Last night's post was some of the "who," but tonight's post is the rest of the "who" and some of the "what," where I'll (crudely) project the names and prices of the roster for next year. Guys like Texeira, Hudson, Furcal and K-Rod likely price themselves out of the Nats' range, but maybe Uncle Teddy will surprise us (probably not).
To do this, I made a beautiful spreadsheet using Google Documents:
As you can (hopefully) tell, I have no idea how to make it show up right on the blog. I'll just direct you to the link where you can look (and sort!). You can see my spreadsheet here.
I'd like to point out 10 "set in stone" players for next year. "Set in stone" does not mean "untouchable" or anything along those lines. Instead it's guys who I can't imagine the Nationals trading and guys who are basically are guaranteed a spot on next year's team and the Nats meanwhile have no reason to trade them (either due to a small contract, or even a large, unmovable contract). Thus, "set in stone" is not necessarily a good thing. The ten players I named: Flores, Zimmerman, Dukes, Milledge, Kearns, Lannan, Bergmann, Balester, Rivera, Hanrahan. I'd say there is a 99.9% chance all 10 of those players are on the Nationals' opening day roster next year (barring injury, of course).
Tomorrow night I'll go through my personal projections, for both the 25 and 40-man rosters. They will include (again, crude) statistical projections for the players on both rosters. I'll also include in the post what I figure the Nationals will do with the players that are on the roster now that I don't project to be there next year. Hopefully by then, I'll figure out how to make stuff from Google Docs able to show up in a blog entry (has to be converted to a picture as far as I know).
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Maybe next year?
No, that's not a concession. Chico's questions today on the Nats' Strategy for the Future has inspired me. I've got a plan of my own. A plan to be .500 next year with minimal moves needed.
First, start signing some mid-level free agents this year (probably type B guys, maybe one type A guy) and then NEXT year start going after the studs. Do what the Tigers did and sign a guy like Pudge this year to build the team around and then fill in the rest of the holes next year.
The foundation is here. It is POSSIBLE to make the playoffs next year, but only if Jim Bowden is canned. It is NOT PROBABLE, by any stretch of the imagination, but I don't find it incredibly hard to see Zimmerman, Milledge, Dukes, Kearns, Flores, Lannan, Balester, Redding, Bergmann, etc. having breakout years.
Here's what I think our lineup and 25-man roster could look like next year with minimal FA signings:
SS-Cristian Guzman (resigned for $14 mil/2 years)
2B-Orlando Hudson (FA signing for $32 mil/3 years)
3B-Ryan Zimmerman
1B-Adam Dunn (FA Signing for $12 mil/1 year)
RF-Austin Kearns
LF-Elijah Dukes
C-Jesus Flores
CF-Lastings Milledge
Rotation:
L-John Lannan
R-Colin Balester
R-Tim Redding
R-Jason Bergmann
L-Oliver Perez (FA signing for $5 mil/1 year)
Relievers:
Closer: Jon Rauch
Setup: FA to be named later (Wheeler was resigned in April)
Middle: Luis Ayala/Saul Rivera (trade one, keep one)
Middle: Steven Shell
Middle: Adam Carr or Zech Zinicola
Situational: Charlie Manning
Long: Joel Hanrahan
Bench:
CA Wil Nieves/Luke Montz
1B Nick Johnson/Dmitri Young (keep one, trade one)
IF Aaron Miles/Mark Loretta/Adam Everett/Pete Orr/Yurendell Decaster/Leonard Davis (signed at $1.5 mil/year or less)
IF/OF Willie Harris
IF/OF Kory Casto
OF Wily Mo Pena
See...a few mid-to-upper level FA signings would really change the complexion of the team. I think that's a lineup and rotation that could make the playoffs, with the assumption that the young hitters progress rather than regress. That's a dangerous assumption, but who can see the team going .500 by simply signing Dunn, Hudson and Perez? The nice thing is this: By signing guys like Dunn and Perez, it shouldn't block youngsters from coming up. They'll likely only demand a 1 year, incentive-laden deals because they've had relative down years this year (Dunn's BA is .228 and Perez' ERA is 4.62). I think we can make it happen. I'd also like to note this: no more assuming Johnson is going to be healthy. I'm planning like he's hurt from now on. Dunn is basically Johnson with a little less AVG/OBP and significantly more power (and better durability).
Here's a list of 2009 FA's by the way:
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2007/12/2009-mlb-free-a.html
First, start signing some mid-level free agents this year (probably type B guys, maybe one type A guy) and then NEXT year start going after the studs. Do what the Tigers did and sign a guy like Pudge this year to build the team around and then fill in the rest of the holes next year.
The foundation is here. It is POSSIBLE to make the playoffs next year, but only if Jim Bowden is canned. It is NOT PROBABLE, by any stretch of the imagination, but I don't find it incredibly hard to see Zimmerman, Milledge, Dukes, Kearns, Flores, Lannan, Balester, Redding, Bergmann, etc. having breakout years.
Here's what I think our lineup and 25-man roster could look like next year with minimal FA signings:
SS-Cristian Guzman (resigned for $14 mil/2 years)
2B-Orlando Hudson (FA signing for $32 mil/3 years)
3B-Ryan Zimmerman
1B-Adam Dunn (FA Signing for $12 mil/1 year)
RF-Austin Kearns
LF-Elijah Dukes
C-Jesus Flores
CF-Lastings Milledge
Rotation:
L-John Lannan
R-Colin Balester
R-Tim Redding
R-Jason Bergmann
L-Oliver Perez (FA signing for $5 mil/1 year)
Relievers:
Closer: Jon Rauch
Setup: FA to be named later (Wheeler was resigned in April)
Middle: Luis Ayala/Saul Rivera (trade one, keep one)
Middle: Steven Shell
Middle: Adam Carr or Zech Zinicola
Situational: Charlie Manning
Long: Joel Hanrahan
Bench:
CA Wil Nieves/Luke Montz
1B Nick Johnson/Dmitri Young (keep one, trade one)
IF Aaron Miles/Mark Loretta/Adam Everett/Pete Orr/Yurendell Decaster/Leonard Davis (signed at $1.5 mil/year or less)
IF/OF Willie Harris
IF/OF Kory Casto
OF Wily Mo Pena
See...a few mid-to-upper level FA signings would really change the complexion of the team. I think that's a lineup and rotation that could make the playoffs, with the assumption that the young hitters progress rather than regress. That's a dangerous assumption, but who can see the team going .500 by simply signing Dunn, Hudson and Perez? The nice thing is this: By signing guys like Dunn and Perez, it shouldn't block youngsters from coming up. They'll likely only demand a 1 year, incentive-laden deals because they've had relative down years this year (Dunn's BA is .228 and Perez' ERA is 4.62). I think we can make it happen. I'd also like to note this: no more assuming Johnson is going to be healthy. I'm planning like he's hurt from now on. Dunn is basically Johnson with a little less AVG/OBP and significantly more power (and better durability).
Here's a list of 2009 FA's by the way:
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2007/12/2009-mlb-free-a.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
