Nationals Baseball: What you can do after 3 games

Thursday, April 08, 2010

What you can do after 3 games

3 games is nothing in a baseball season. It's a blip. It's a dozen at bats and a single appearance. You can't draw conclusions from 3 games no matter how much one may want to because, dammit, what else is there to talk about? Craig Stammen didn't look strong? He's Craig Stammen!

Instead of drawing conclusions, it's time to focus on a few things that may be trends and keep an eye on them through the next couple series. What is there to focus on for Nats fans?

Ian Desmond's fielding It's one thing if he struggles, it's another if he maintains an error a game pace. Lannan and Mock are both contact pitchers, as is Stammen (and Wang whenever he gets here). The worse Desmond is the greater the temptation will be to put Guzman in.

Right Field Can Morse field? Can willY hit? Will it matter when Riggleman seems to happy with his "menage a trois droit"? This is not a waiting to see if things can work out. This is waiting to see how bad things get. The minor annoynace of below average or a soul-sucking black hole?

Overworking the Pen Anyone want to guess which team has thrown the most relief innings so far? The Cardinals? That's crazy! It's the Nats of course even with 4 teams playing one more game than the DC Club. This pen isn't as horrible as people may think, but that doesn't mean it's good enough to carry the load. If the Mets -Beltran/Reyes give the Nats starters issues...

Patience The Nats have never been a patient team, and if it weren't for Dunn, they'd be scraping the bottom of the NL in free passes. They were able to work a struggling Hamels, but outside of that didn't stretch the Phillies much.


Sec 204 Row H Seat 7 said...

1-2 is still 1-2 and the NATS are thus ahead at last year's pace. Remember 70-75 wins would be an "improvment" but that still means 92-87 losses.

Anonymous said...

1-2 is on pace for 54-108. That's an improvement?

Hoo said...

I feel really good at 1-2 vs 0-3. If the Nats had rallied to lose last night it would have been a gut punch. Not too unexpected if they had lost but very demoralizing. The early games don't matter for most teams but the Nats need to not totally suck.

Nats last year were just awful, awful vs the Phils. And to get a win already is nice. Especially, since I think the Nats will get a lot better as the season goes on.

I'd be selling stock in Clippard's elbow if I had any. He's gonna be worked very hard this year.

Guzman is playing very well right now. A much more pleasant alternative to the Lopez/Belliard of previous seasons. He could be a positive this year and get something decent in trade.

Anyway, the fact that the Nats actually beat the Phils and won an early season game puts a hop in my step.

Bryan said...

I agree. 1-2 is meeting expectations.

How can you honestly expect any more given the factors at play:

A) for whatever reason, the Nats are a painfully slow starting team, year in and year out

B) it was the Phils. The Phils are odds on favorite to play in teh Series, and have been in teh Series the last two years. That's a best of the league match up against a just above worst in teh league match up. How many do you really expect the Nats to win in that match up?

C) The Nats have scored 11 runs in 3 games (3.75 r/game) against what is believed to be one of the better pitching line ups in the league. And they've scored 10 runs in 2 games (5 r/game) against guys not named Halladay.

Yeah, I'll take that, actually, over last year, where they started out on a pace to win, what, 20 games?

Harper said...

All : We're at the funny point of the year where every 2 game streak is going wildly swing how you feel abou them team. If they are sitting at 3-2, you can't help think that they might be pretty good. If they are at 1-4 all the "here we go again thoughts" will creep back. It's hard but we have to look past that. As long as the team stays within a few games of .500 through April they should be ok for that 70-75 total we expect them to hit.

Hoo: I like Guzman and Harris as the Nats subs. As bad as he may be Guzman is that put the ball in play guy you sometimes want up at times late in the game. Harris can get on base and field pretty good to boot. Too bad Harris is a starter...

Hoo said...

Harper: Agree totally on Guzie. He could be the best Pinch hitter the nats have had in years. When a guy's on second, you're looking for a contact kinda guy. And guzie's lack of walking or pop isn't as important there.

As for RF, I think you need a shout out to the Chiefs to see if Maxwell can re-emerge to occupy the position like the Nats want him to do (let's see 0-4 with a walk. Go Mike Morse!)...And there's dark horses Bernadino and Mench who could surpass the failing Maxwell.

Ryan said...

A 1-2 record against the Phils and some definite struggles doesn't worry me much. The Phils are MUCH MUCH better than the Nats. This series against the Mets is one that I'm much more interested to see.

The Mets, without Reyes and Beltran, stink. If Lannan gets worked over again, and we get blown out once or twice, yeah count me as a bit worried. I think we should take 2 of 3 from this team, though I really don't know what in the world to expect out of Mock tonight so it could maybe be a tough start to the series.