Nationals Baseball: Quick Stats & a thought

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Quick Stats & a thought

Nats Pitching
190 1/3 IP, 1.46 WHIP 4.82 ERA
Nats Pitching excluding Livan, Clippard, & Capps
131 1/3 IP, 1.68 WHIP 6.65 ERA

Nats Relievers
78 IP, 1.37 WHIP 3.92 ERA
Nats Relievers excluding Clippard & Capps
50 IP, 1.54 WHIP 5.76 ERA

Nats Starters
112 1/3 IP, 1.51 WHIP 5.45 ERA
Nats Starters excluding Livan
81 1/3 IP, 1.76 WHIP 7.19 ERA

Fawn over the players, and fawn over the manager if you must. But before you fawn over the front office, please remember that if they had it their way the player most responsible for the Nats .500 start would not have been on this team.

(side thought - I never got a chance to say this yesterday but Nats fans should thank Sweet Lou for sending out a righty heavy lineup versus John Lannan yesterday. The end result didn't turn out the way the Nats wanted, but with lefties smashing John for a .542 / .538 / .792. line coming into the game, the Cubs lineup certainly helped the Nats stay in that game. It must have taken an incredible commitment to old school tactics to ignore that line.)


ckstevenson said...

What would be the overall Nats pitching line if we excluded the three worst offenders?

Harper said...

back of the envelope - losing Marquis, Batista, and Bergmann.

1.39 WHIP, 3.78 ERA or something close.

really though you'd only cut Maruqis and Bergmann - it's three groups

(1) Livan, Clippard and Capps under 0.90
(2) Marquis and Bergmann over 15.00 ERA
(3) everyone else between 3.86 and 6.75, most between 5.40 and 5.87

(ok there's a Atilano start in there as well - let's see if today doesn't bring him up to everyone else)

Hoo said...

I'd say Marquis deserves his own group. 3 starts of incredible suckiness as compared to Bergies shorter stint of crap.

I think the FO always wanted Livo but the Dettweiler thing forced their hand.

Still the front office's ceiling this year is a B. They can't do better than that b/c of the black hole of death in right field. I mean Willy Taveras was considered a potential answer. He can't even steal bases going 1/3! I can only hope that Bernie stays up and Willy goes far, far away.

I'm giddy about seeing how Luis does today. Leaving Stras out of the equation entirely, there are several real starting prospects in the Nats org that could be the real deal and aren't named Martin, Martis, Chico or Bally. Dettweiler, my player of destiny, and Atilano. All top picks who are showing solid progress. This can make Nats buyers when it comes time to make the mid-summer playoff push trade. Then we'll see how the FO does.

Anonymous said...

As awesome/ refreshing as this start has been, this is not a playoff team. The Nats should be open to moving anyone not named Zimmerman or Desmond at the trade deadline, not buyers.

Anonymous said...

But before you fawn over the front office, please remember that if they had it their way the player most responsible for the Nats .500 start would not have been on this team.

Not sure what you mean by this. You talking about Livo? You saying the FO doesn't want him on the team? Well, if that's true then why did they sign him? Just because they waited until they could get him at a good price doesn't mean they didn't want him on the team.

Of course they wanted Livo on the team. Here's an example of someone they didn't want on the team: Dukes. Do you see now how you can tell the difference?

Harper said...

Hoo - I'm not giddy but I'm very interested in what Atilano shows today. I'm tired of overacheivers over reaching to get to the majors then coming up short. Time for some underacheivers to start living up to their potentials.

Also maybe I missed something but I don't recall the FO doing much courting of Livan prior to the Detwiler injury. He might have been in the back of their minds but I didn't see them wanting him. He was begging for a job.

Anon #1 - That's a valid POV, but it's one trading a certain 70 win 2011, for a hopeful 95 win 2014, instead of a hopeful 80 win 2011 and a slightly less hopeful 95 win 2014

Anon #2 - Not that they don't want him on the team now, they didn't want him on the team then. "Then" being prior to Detwiler's injury. It wasn't about price - when you haven't signed until late February you can certainly have been had cheap. When many of us were saying the Nats needed one more pitcher that could be counted on to eat innings, they were fully prepared to go with Lannan - Marquis - Detwiler - whoever - whoever. Signing Hernandez was an emergency move. It's turned out great - these moves sometimes can - but that's a product of good fortune not a wily FO.

Hoo said...

The only everyday starters I'd trade would be Dunn, Guzie or Kennedy. Pitchers on the other hand are pretty much make an offer. Livo should definitely be traded. Ditto Olsen, Capps, Marquis et al.

The Hammer should not be traded except for a huge, huge return. I don't want the Nats having to fill both corner OF in the offseason. I'd rather not trade Pudge (who would take him?), b/c I doubt Flores is back this year. Not sure why you trade Morgan unless you think Max/Bernie can be as good. Why breakup the core hitters when you're trying to make the leap next year?

As for pitchers...I'd consider everyone on the active roster trade goods but for Clips.

The important part of the better quality org depth is so when the Nats DO make the run, they have commodities to trade. They won't make a run this year, but hopefully next year when Thompson, Atilano etc will be attractive.

I think it's time to stop trying to flip everyone for prospects. They've identified a core and it's time to keep it and build around it.

Hoo said...

Interesting that Riggs pulled Atilano for Bruney. I don't think that Riggs is letting starters go longer than Acta except for guys who can like Livo vs. Martis/Cabrera.

Also, how little faith does Rigs have in Burnette as a leftie? If you have a left hander in the pen, I can't believe you don't use him in the 7th vs. Fukodome there.