Interesting way to spin the question, Barry. I'm okay with them making a move and I'm okay with them not making a move. I don't think either route abrogates The Plan. I tend to feel more suspicious of making a move, just because we have so few pieces left that are really valuable (Cordero, Rauch) and those pieces are just as valuable to us as to another team. It makes me nervous that JimBo is going to be trading for the sake of trading.

Don't forget to give us a Frank story!

So how was Albany?
Thought I saw your name above the fold in the .35 daily . . . .

Barry -- the Reds TV guys yesterday stated on the air that there were "intense discussions" about trading Dunn and pretty much indicated that they expected Dunn to be gone by the deadline. They were framing Dunn's last AB yesterday as likely his last as a Red. They didn't name the Nats specifically as trading partners, though. Have you heard anything about discussions with the Reds about Dunn or is the extent of what you're hearing about interest (which as you point out, interest alone means nothing....)

I believe you'l report on 8/1/07 the Nats trades were extending DY & RB's contracts.

Cameron Maybin for Rauch? Seriously? At what point does the "asking for the moon" stuff turn counterproductive? I cannot imagine a reasonable discussion coming out of a conversation that included that proposal.

How close does the Kasten-Bowden brain trust think we are to contending. Not winning the division, or even the wild-card, but playing MEANINGFUL games in September?

If you think 2008 is not too soon than trading Cordero and/or Rauch is a major mistake.

Personally I believe they are that close, but to get there they need;

1. Health (Statistically we are DUE for a good year with the DL)
2. A Difference making CENTER fielder (If Kearns and Young are your corners the only spot on the field available for a major upgrade is Center Field - and I mean an upgrade over Church not the Langerhans/Logan platoon since that was supposed to get shelved as soon as Escobar came back)
3. An Ace Pitcher (Patterson if he can be like he was in 2005 or probably a FA pickup since I don't see anyone in the system ready to move into that role for next year).

I think the return of Nick Johnson is still the key to the whole offence. He had an OPS of .948 last year, far outpasing Young, Zimmerman or even Soriano. As soon as he can play the field without hurting himself you WILL see him at 1B, Young is playing LF next year and backing up Johnson, but cannot replace him...

What? Bowden trading for the sake of trading? That'd never happen!!

Will the Nats still control Redding and Hanrahan since they were brought in on minor league deals or would they have to work something out to be sure they keep them (if they want to keep them)?

I think trade now will bring marginally better return than off season trades.

Chad, Rauch should be traded because they are not difference makers on this team.....Lopez must go by next year because he is not worth the money at all......Fick, Batista, Logan, all must go in order to be show progress on the PLAN. These 3 are not major leagues and must go before this team can be progress.

Cordero or Rauch for Maybin... OK, maybe not, but who else do the Tigers have in the pipe? Or how else could the deal be structured?

The Tigers have gotta resolve the back-of-the-bullpen situation, because if their slugging ever tails off, even a little, they are toast. (And my Dad's Tribe takes its rightful spot atop the AL Central.)

Todd Jones' 27 saves say more about the worth of the save statistic than about the worth of Jones in the closer's role.

I think that the Nats will tend to do better through trade than through free agency... and by free agency, I mean top-tier free agency... and the reason is economic.

When you're negotiating a trade, you're negotiating with a peer in the economic system - that is, another team... whose interests are more or less aligned with your own. They are looking to preserve value in terms of talent gained and lost, manage payroll, etc., just as you are. Both parties have an incentive to keep prices competitive, because they want to be able to make deals within that system, and having prices get out of line inhibits transactions. It is for this reason that it is bad to see a feeding frenzy at the trade deadline, and similarly bad to see it quiet... it means that there is some discrepancy in the perception of the players in the marketplace that makes deals either overly attractive or overly prohibitive. I think this trade deadline is a little quieter than normal.

In contrast, when you're talking about free agency, your negotiating partner does not share your interests at all, and has no interest in making sure that the prices are competitive... and in fact, free agency puts a damper on trades, because it makes expensive players unpalatable as pieces in a trade.

The Nats have an important negative (at least, this is my perception) in the trade market, and that is Bowden. I get the sense that other GMs don't respect or trust Bowden, and this drives the price of trade pieces higher... or conversely, drives the perceived value of the Nats pieces lower. The thing is, because there is not an apples-to-apples comparison that one could make between the cost of a player acquired through free agency, and a player acquired through trade, it is hard to know whether the Bowden premium you pay in a trade outweighs the cost of a free agent contract... though I suspect that it does. In addition, Bowden seems to come out on the long side of most trades, and I suspect that influences other GMs to ask even higher prices of the Nats.

Anyway, I think that the Nats are more likely to do better through the trade route than through the free agency route... In addition, the pool of available players is higher in the trade market, and that tends to keep prices lower, too.

In free agency, it simply becomes a matter of dollars, with other considerations such as the health of the organization, competitiveness, etc. being secondary... and in that scenario, the advantage is with the player.

As an academic example ONLY, in my opinion, the Nats would be better off trading for Soriano straight up today than going into the free agent market and getting a similar player... not that they should trade for Soriano, or that the Cubs would give him up... but that the value would be better in the long run... and I think Soriano's contract is outrageous.

Welcome back, Barry (sort of). Neither Dunn nor Pena are the type of 40 HR hitters for which I would want to give up Rauch and Cordero. We need someone who can play defense in CF as well.

How about Lopez and Rivera to the Mets for Milledge?

JayB - Cordero and Rauch are HUGE difference makers especially given the certainity of another very young pitching staff next year. They shorten the game for the starters.

There are a number of players on the 'Under Control' list that are just warm bodies taking up space in the dugout/bullpen (read Ayala, Langerhans, Logan, etc.) All of these guys should be making MLB minimum wage.

Rauch and Cordero's trade value is about as high right now as it will ever be which is the same reason they should have/could still move/d Dmitri. Packaging Chad/Rauch deal together for a power guy could be well worth it in the end even though it may seem unreasonable in the short term. We seem to have a number of pitching prospects to fill bullpen holes.

I want someone to be able to sniff 40 HRs in the new stadium and I'm not sure that guy is on the roster right now...

estuartj begins his assertion, "As soon as he [NJ] can play the field without hurting himself..."

At this point Nickie J is 0 for 6 doing that in his career. Every season he's been on the DL (except maybe his first).

Here's his career number of games per season:
2001: 23
2002: 129
2003: 96
2004: 73
2005: 131
2006: 147
2007: 0 to date

He'd never be accused fairly of being Alex Escobar, but he's no Iron Man either. I think Meat Hook is insurance. Left field is a red herring.

Wow! I forgot all about Guzman already ! How is he doing?

Keep:
Zimmerman
Flores
Chico
Bergmann
Hill

Consider trading anyone else on the "non-signed" list.

Wow! I forgot all about Guzman already ! How is he doing?

Keep:
Zimmerman
Flores
Chico
Bergmann
Hill

Consider trading anyone else on the "non-signed" list.

Are Minor League Free Agents like Hanrahan under club control next year?

This is an interesting point of view, and, in terms of karma, it's entirely accurate.

However, it's also based on the supposition that the common denominator in most of our injuries has been plain bad luck. More and more, I'm having a hard time believing the training staff is not culpable in our ever-inflating DL.

-----

1. Health (Statistically we are DUE for a good year with the DL)

Hendo, that would be sweet for your dad and my Aunt Mary both!

(And my Dad's Tribe takes its rightful spot atop the AL Central.)

(responding from the previous thread):

natscan, why do you think Shawn Hill would be gone? Can't make it back from injury? Trade?

... I have a gut feeling that Shawn does mean as much to the team as Bergmann does. So I think he is more expendable. And his injury rep is no help. I don't like saying this; he is a Canadian after all, but my senses are that he'd be someone they'd like to trade and who other teams might be interested in. I get the feeling it's simply not important enough to the admin. to keep him around.

And why would Saul Rivera be gone? Trade, I'd presume, as he's not pitching all that badly this year.

... I don't recall him being anything outstanding - at least enough to stick around if and when trades are offered.

I'll not ask why you think Patterson will be gone. Obviously he'll still
be up in your country seeking ever more bizarre medical treatments that
have yet to be approved in the US. Either that or in Mexico doing the
same, with the odd witch doctor attending him every now and then as
well.

... I'll choose not to bite at the obvious enticment about witch doctors, under the assumption all was said in jest at any rate. As for Johnny P., I simply think he's done like dinner.

Reply to: Section 419 | July 30, 2007 02:28 PM

"Cordero and Rauch: There is some thought they could be packaged together for a stud hitter, a 40-homer guy that the Nationals so badly need."

But what good is that 40-homer guy if the pitching staff -- now ostensibly depleted with Cordero and Rauch gone -- can't hold a lead? Who in the current bullpen is good enough to replace those two?

I don't think Bowden's going to make a trade for the sake of trading. If we've learned anything over the last year, it's that Kasten has Trader Jim on a relatively short leash when it comes to making trades.
What I haven't seen from the doubters is who's going to play first if Young is traded and Johnson doesn't return. It's not like Dimitri is blocking a potential star minor-league first baseman from coming up. What are the odds they pick another player off the scrap heap this winter who performs at the level we've seen from Young, even assuming his batting reverts to his pre-diabetes treatment career averages?

Barry, welcome back (despite the Vaudevillian flying joke). I'm looking forward to a Frank story, too.

re. trades generally, I don't want them to make a trade just to make one. Without knowing what other teams are offering, it's hard to judge (at least from my non-expert standpoint).

Nick715, re. Ayala, I don't see him as a warm body taking up space in the 'pen, particularly if he returns to 2005 form. This is his first year back after surgery and in my (again, admittedly not expert) opinion he's been looking good overall.

"How about Lopez and Rivera to the Mets for Milledge?"
lowcountrynatsfan

MAKE THAT TRADE TODAY!

I understand the your view (lowcountrynatsfan) of the value of Chad and Rauch but I feel Ayala and Colome could do the job just about the same for much less and I would like a CF please!

To echo a comment a week or so ago (my apologies for stealing it) anything we can get for Bowden we should take. Cordero, Rauch, et al should stay.

How frustrating is it that our GM is taken seriously by maybe a small fraction of MLB GM's? I do credit Bowden with signing players other organizations ignored (Tim Redding, Joel Hanrahan, for example) or wanted no part of (Dimitri Young), but pulling off effective trades seems unrealistic as long as he is the man in charge.

Servo,

i see no way young is still traded. johnson will start at 1B asap and young will then be the every day lf. This isn't permanent of course, but young helps the team grow up and he's saving a place for the Marreros of the minor league system.

Also for Servo,

There isn't anyone else in the system ready to play 1B besides johnson and young. young is too expensive just to be a backup so he will play everyday, either at 1b until johnson is back or in lf as soon as he is.

This goes to my original point, as for position players the place we CAN improve for 2008 is at CF. So if we can get a Rowland type player (is Rowland a FA this year?) then with johnson back, and hopefully zim, lop, kearns, etc having better years in the new stadium then the nats have enough BATTING to compete into September.

pitching is a seperate issue of course and the need to find a top of the order pitcher of the quality patterson WAS at in 2005 is something we haven't talked about much at all on these pages...

Trade Cordero today, he's absolutely replaceable.

Not liking the prospect of Dunn as a Nat.

I doubt any significant trade will come by tomorrow.

GoNats: The reason that Bowden isn't respected is not that he isn't good... I suspect that he's actually one of the best GMs, in fact (I know I'll hear about that)... but his personality rubs people the wrong way. The other thing is, he makes trades that end up kinda one-sided, in his favor. The Kearns/Lopez for everyone trade is one example, and the only thing that really overshadows that trade is the questions about Majewski... I think the protest is really blue smoke, and the Reds had to protest to save face...

The league's perception of JimBo's persona will change with time, though I think... When people respect the Nats, they'll respect Bowden... those kinds of things don't change overnight.

The problem with trading for a CF right now is that there are many who will become FAs at the end of the season (Jones, Rowand, Hunter, Cameron). Which means there will be a lot of movement during the off-season at that position even among teams that don't sign one of the big boys. So I think we wait.

While agree with Wigi's analysis regarding trades vice free agency in general - and I would add that besides the economic disadvantages he discusses we also possess some competitive disadvantages (i.e, the BoSox can realistically lure Aaron Rowand with the idea of playing in the World Series next year) - I disagree with the analysis in this instance.

I think getting a top notch CF is our priority for the off-season. We should pursue Rowand (despite my skepticism articulated above) and Jones in particular on the free agent market. If those efforts do not pan-out, then we make a trade for a Crisp or Pierre or Pie once the dominos tumble.

I agree the bullpen appears strong, but Rauch and Cordero are now tested veterans - and we should not let them go quietly into the night.

Barry: They need to beef up the lineup while getting younger. Despite what some are saying here, there is no way I believe Meat Hook is going back to the OF (that was two years and about 30 pounds ago; watch the man try to chase down a foul pop down the line). I think he stays until the winter or spring training, when they can get a better feel for Nick Johnson's future. So the only real option is to trade either Rauch or Cordero. As much as I like them, I'd trade them for fair value. I agree with the "Moneyball" theory: closers are not that hard to find. I'd go with Ayala for now, with Rivera and Colome (when he comes back) also in line for a shot. We may need as many as three new OF's by next year to have a real lineup.

Rowand is an FA. I offer this site again which gives free agents in '08 and '09 as well

http://www.mlb4u.com/freeagency.php

Nats asked for Maybin when we were discussing Soriano last trade deadline, while still a longshot for a rent-a-player, at least Soriano has the difference maker talent. Asking for Maybin for Rauch is silly and reflects badly on the organization.

Aaron Rowand in a Nats uniform thanks to a FA sounds pretty good. We've got money to spend.

Trade Rauch. I love the wookie but he is just another good Nat who would be a roleplayer, at best, on a championship team. As we build towards a title we can't hold on to this type of player just because they're one of our best and we would miss them. We need difference-makers.

And I really hate to say it and I'm knocking on wood as I type, but if you lead the majors in appearances, doesn't your chance of injury go up?

Nick Johnson is not coming back.

to those that think we should trade Cordero and maybe use Colome as the closer:

Are you kidding me?! I'm not the biggest Cordero fan, but I will give him his props. He is a battle-tested closer and even if he blows a save or two, he comes back night after night to do his job. Sure there are times that I want to reach into the TV screen and punch his lights out for walking the leadoff man, but he still has over 100 saves in less than 4 seasons. Is it possible for him to be a bust in the new ballpark? Sure, there's a possibility. But he could also thrive there. We won't know until he starts playing there.

BTW, in the past 3 years, Cordero has 38 saves in 44 chances on the road compared to 52 saves in 61 chances. His ERA away is 2.52 and at home it's 2.78. He's given up 14 HR's on the road in 110 IP; 16 HR's in 119 IP at home. Doesn't seem to me that he's that much better at RFK than on the road. Just sayin'.

As for Colome, he couldn't cut it with the Devil Rays, and they always need relievers. He was having a decent year so far with the Nats, but it was only for half a season. In his 7 year career he has a grand total of 6 saves and 14 blown saves. He averages less than 1 K per inning pitched. He is not a candidate for closer.

Now, if JimBo can finagle a deal for a top-notch CF with power for Chad, then I'd take it in a second. I just don't want to put my faith in Colome as my closer.

e:

Ahhhhh, love a little stats. Thank you for the persuasive argument. I was on the fence and I think you've won me over.

I really, REALLY, want to know... how do other teams think about this? We say "which of our guys are tradeable?" but I guarantee that other clubs don't say "I want a National, which of those guys is tradeable?" What does the rest of the market look like?

(responding from the previous thread):

Nice work Natscan: I've reformatted it to continue the discussion.
Adding your list to my earlier one, we get something like this:

Starters
Jason Bergmann (starter)
Matt Chico (starter)
Joel Hanrahan (starter)
Ross Detwiler (starter)
John Lannan (starter)
Colin Ballester (starter)

Bullpen
Luis Ayala (bullpen)
Jesus Colome (bullpen)
Chad Cordero (bullpen)
Ray King (bullpen)
Jon Rauch (bullpen)
Ryan Wagner (bullpen)

Position players

C: Brian Schneider
1b: Nick Johnson
2b: Ronnie Belliard
SS: Christian Guzman
3B: Ryan Zimmerman
LF: Dimitri Young
CF: To Be Acquired
RF: Austin Kearns

Back up catcher: Jesus Flores
PHs: Felipe Lopez and Alex Escobar
Small ball player: D'Angelo Jimenez

Here's where I would disagree:
1. I still think the Nats should keep working with Redding, Hill, and
Patterson in that order. They cannot count on the kiddie corps
triumvirate all year. I'd start at least two of those guys at AAA and
make one of your six starters a long reliever.

... okay but that translates into a lot of talk this season about the farm pitchers being ready and keeping them in the minors next year. My take is that the Nats are in a position (enviable?) where they either have the luxury or the misfortune of bringing up new guys and putting into the mix right away. I can't see Redding being on tap (except as a long reliever/fifth starter) next year. I'd like to see Hill, but I doubt they'd keep both he and Bergmann, if Chico, Detwiler, Lannan and Hanrahan are also starting. And as I said to Sect419, I personally doubt I'll ever see Johnny P. wear a "W" cap again.

2. Lopez will not start over Belliard. Lopez is slated to make over $4
million next year. He won't sit on the bench making that much money. He
needs to produce or be traded to free up the money.

... my first thought was to trade Flippie, but where do we get a utility infielder? Trade for one I suppose, but we already have one in Lopez. Granted, he'd be an awfully overpaid one. So on revision, it's trade Flip and take on a utility guy for back-up.

3. Who are the three >.350 OBA guys? How about Johnson, Young, and ?.
Maybe the newly acquired CF, I'm not sure. I don't think we can count on
Guzzy. He does not walk enough, but I still like him at SS. The three

>.450 SLG guys? Johnson, Young and Zim hopefully. Lopez and Kearns don't

or barely make the 320 OBA and 375 SLG marks. They need to be better.
The three great defensive players? Schneider, Zim, and I would say as a
2B, Lopez.

... I'll answer #3 and #4 with this one reply. I admitted my poor knowledge of important things and two are: weighing the statistical analysis (offensive) of position players, and not keeping in mind the righty/lefty thing in terms of pitching/hitting. On these two fronts, I yield to your judgement, but my rota of names doesn't change because of it; it simply makes a difference who you trade for, who you sign as spring walk-ons, who you rotate through the farm.

4. I have no faith that Escobar will ever be healthy. I know that
contradicts my statement in #1, but I don't see it. That leaves Belliard
as a good pinch hitter. They need another LH bat off the bench - a
Daryle Ward type. Does Lenny Harris have any gas left in his tank? Just
kidding. I'm fine with DJ as the small ball guy - even Nook maybe if
he's willing to sit. I just don't like his instincts which tend to be
crucial late in close games - the time his skills will most be needed.
They need to dig up some Reggie Sanders type guys - veterans who stay
ready even when they're on the bench.

... sorry but in terms of health/injury, we might apply the same reasoning to many others that you do to Escobar. My roster was for opening day, and I have no qualms about suggesting Alex could very well be there on opening day. He could then break his elbow in the second game, on a fluke bunt attempt.

Reply to: #4 | July 30, 2007 02:59 PM

Rauch is most likely to go because he's a set-up man while Cordero is a closer. Teams won't give "closer value" for Cordero but will give 'set-up value" for Rauch.

Id like to see a trade...not to just make one (although I might have some Bowdenitis there...I love trades...Im a trade junkie) but to improve this team now, and for the future. Makes sense, right?

These are all great discussions. I love this.

1. To answer Barry, I'd be happy standing pat. We don't have to trade.

2. I liked the scout's comment that Rauch is the type of guy that if you trade now, you'll need to trade for a similar guy later when you get in contention. I think we forget how good we have it with the Nats bullpen. Everyone needs relief pitching (except the Nats!!!) It's not easy to find and shouldn't be given up easily. Rauch may be a "role" player, but a crucial one.

3. Wigi's FA v trade explanation was a little over my head, but the one thing I don't think you consider is that in a trade you give up pieces to get pieces. In FA you don't lose any players.

4. Our DL situation is not a statistical fluke that will turn back in our favor. The Nats training staff needs to pick it up a level.

5. I'm with GoNats on Bowden. It's not good to have a GM that other clubs don't like and respect. Can we also stop giving him credit for the great Lopez/Kearns trade? The best one can say right now is that it was one group of 2nd division players for another group.

6. I liked your responses, Natscan. I tend to be a little more patient and conservative with pitchers than you appear to be, but you make a compelling argument. I think there are many examples of late bloomers on the mound and also guys who've been rushed and wrecked. You see that less with hitters. You're pretty much what you're going to be when you're 25 at the plate. I'd keep at least Hill and Redding around. With Patterson, I'm almost at the end of my rope. We'll have to agree to disagree about Escobar. I'm done with him.

I'd love to hear other takes on our combined effort.

Bowden entertains me, but I think his low stature among his peers and the sports-writing opinion makers probably works against the Nats making good trades. For pete's sake, does no on etalk to him in depth? Are the only people he can consider obtaining Reds or ex-Reds?

He has to be let go at the end of the year. The Soriano debacle was embarassing, and although Dmitri has been great, he was supposed to be a trading chip. Bowden didn't even wait until after the deadline to resign him, and for a year too many.

It's just a shame that Escobar can't stay healthy, he has talent. As far as Patty goes, I think it might be the end of the line for him. His track record gives no indication that he will ever be dependable. So it goes for NJ, though he played a lot last year and the year before. Although it truly was a fluke injury, it just continued a laundry list of bumps in his career. Although Cordero gives me cause to go for a stiff drink occasionally, I do think he has a future with this club. Think closers are easily replaced...check with the Braves. He could be here for a long, long time, hopefully. With JimBo though, the unpredictability factor has to be considered. Who can predict what he's thinking. If we bloggers can come up with 1001 scenarios, you know he can double that. Can he find a partner to dance is his dilemma. My druthers are to stand pat and get a top notch FA centerfielder this winter. The small chips will take care of themselves, no need to rush those type of decisions.

#4:

The point that I was trying to make is essentially what you are saying... that is, the "cost" is not in dollars, but in perceived value of talent, change in payroll, etc., so yes, you do give up something in terms of players and talent to get something in a trade. However, your negotiating parter in a trade shares your motivations about cost, value, etc. so you are more likely to come to a consensus about value because you're speaking the same language, and the [payroll expenditure is known in advance. For a player in free agency, it is mostly about maximizing salary, and not much about anything else... and it is inherently more contentious.

In the free agent market, the player isn't swayed by the impact of his salary on the total payroll, because there is always another bidder out there with a competitive offer. That pressure is much smaller in the trade market.

Tomorrow afternoon when the dust clears, we'll all be wondering how Bowden missed a golden opportunity to continue restocking the farm system...pulling his best chips off the table too early, asking for waaaay too much in return (which maybe isn't all his fault -- isn't it the job of the revamped scouting department to identify value in other teams' systems and point him in the right direction?). Like this Maybin-for-Rauch business -- that's the kind of goofy trade only an idiot blogger or a fan would come up with.

Then again, all is forgiven if he lands Wily Mo Pena in exchange for Rauch, straight up! Go get Wily Mo, Jimbo!

Shawn Hill is making a rehab start at Potomac tonight, and it's important enough to the Nationals that Manager Manny Acta will be giving up his off day to be there in person to watch him pitch. Presumably if Manny is there Randy St. Claire will be there as well. One would think that any newspaper sports department worth its salt for Nationals coverage would have a reporter there tonight to provide its readers with an independent assessment of how Hill looks on the mound, above and beyond the bare statistical line and the usual spin from Nats management - even if it means sending an intern or a stringer or pulling someone off the Orioles beat for the night so the paper's regular Nats beat reporter can have a well-deserved night off or cover the trade deadline story. Will the Post have anyone in Pfitzner Stadium this evening? I'll be looking to see that when I pick up the 35 cent edition from my driveway tomorrow morning.

Thanks, Wigi. That helps.

Another point though perhaps in the FA's favor in terms of the Nats is that as they are trying a big bat, we should remember unlike most teams, they will be increasing payroll significantly this year. Economically one can look at as placing into their salary structure a piece or two that should be there anyway given this market size. For this one time only, FA might make more sense.

Swanni corrects valuation perspectives: "Teams won't give 'closer value' for Cordero but will give 'set-up value' for Rauch."

I owe Swanni an apology. Many threads ago, I accused him of being Chevy Chase in disguise. Now I wonder if he is Bill James?

Answering Barry's question, which I guess earlier I alluded to obliquely but not directly:

If a deal must be made, let it be for a short-term CF, such as an Edmonds (pre-migraine and pinched nerve -- not sure where he's at now). We will have to give up Rauch or Cordero; whomever would be better to yield depends on the rest of the deal.

If a deal isn't made, I won't complain. I think.

Hendo -

Why would you want to give up a 25 year old or so (Cordero, 24 and Rauch, 28)back end of the bullpen reliever for a mid to late 30's CF (Edmonds, 37). I don't think it's ever good to trade young pitching for old hitting.

#4 quizzes: ". . . I don't think it's ever good to trade young pitching for old hitting."

Not by itself, probably, but as I say, it depends on "the rest of the deal." One or more prospects, or cash, or the Cards picking up Edmonds' salary for the balance of the season, would just about have to be in the mix.

And I don't want it to be Edmonds anyway, I think. His name just clatters around my mind.

If you are going to get roughly the same deal for Cordero or Rauch, why would you trade Cordero? Answer: You wouldn't.

Hendo....Edmonds clatters in mind...help this man out. Edmonds a very good pick up if this were 1997. I agree Swanni...keep Cordero, unless you get something that just knocks it out of the park...consistently and is young eneough to cement the plan for several years to come.

I had the impression that Edmonds was something of a prima donna from his tiff with LaRussa during the postseason games last year (according to newspaper/tv reports, which may or may not have been accurate, there was a tiff, anyway).

Swanni compares: "If you are going to get roughly the same deal for Cordero or Rauch, why would you trade Cordero? Answer: You wouldn't."

Perhaps not, on the surface. But, considering a little deeper, trading Cordero would offload more salary. I'm not sure Rauch will soon (or maybe ever) make what Cordero's getting now.

That's not to disrepect Rauch. Rather, it's a reflection of the vagary of the still-ridiculous salary market for closers. The Nats should consider exploiting it while they can.

SC Nats Fan: Re clattering, Edmonds is a CF I liked before he started to have all the health issues, so his name was a placeholder.

Other more appropriate names are welcome.

"Wigi's FA v trade explanation was a little over my head, but the one thing I don't think you consider is that in a trade you give up pieces to get pieces. In FA you don't lose any players." - comment from #4.

... I think what Wigi was getting at is that a trade is made between team administrations, so the players involved are truly pieces from each team. But signing an FA is a deal between a team management and a player directly. The basic values are essentially parallel in the first case, but not at all so in the latter.

... also signing an FA can very well involve losing players since it directly alters the salary level of the team, and even without a cap, a team has its own arbitrarily imposed limit to what it wants to spend. Depending on what the FA costs, the team will then have to make adjustments, sometimes to the point of jettisoning someone who might be kept otherwise.

All these comments are scary good.

We might've needed to slap ourselves around a bit off topic to get back on topic.

nats Enquirer says "Tomorrow afternoon when the dust clears, we'll all be wondering how Bowden missed a golden opportunity ..."

... or maybe we'll all be quite thankful for how we stood pat, even though it mightn't have been JimBow's doing.

... and now this: can we hire Hendo as our own personal scout to go to the game tonight in Potomac and report on Shawn's performance? Or maybe someone else would be up for the job.

Dang, Natscan. If I'd had the wit to think of it six hours ago, I'd be in Woodbridge tonight. As it is, I'll be reading the P-Nats box score in the morning with the rest of y'all.

And now for something completely different -- MLB's Bill Ladson, whose analyses I like a lot, comments on the catching situation:

"There is no question Schneider is not having a good year with the bat, but he is having a good year behind the plate. He is one of the reasons the starting pitching has overachieved this year. However, I think the Nationals have to make a decision between him and Jesus Flores for next year. It's clear to me that Flores is not a bench player. There's no doubt in my mind that he is a star in the making. It would be a waste to see Flores on the bench next year."

Yeah. What he said. Other thoughts?

Boy, the Mets fans sure are touchy. Take Saturday's dramatic one-run win over the Mets. Here's what heppened during the game:

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A New York man has been charged with beating his mother to death with a barbell after losing his temper while watching a baseball game on television.

Michael Anthony, 25, was watching the New York Mets lose a game on Saturday from his home in the borough of Queens when he began furiously banging on the walls, Queens District Attorney Richard Brown said in a statement on Monday.

His father Fred Fischman shouted at him to stop, but Anthony punched him in the face and threw him to the ground, according to the criminal charges.

When Anthony's mother, Maria Fischman, 61, tried to intervene, prosecutors said he stabbed her once in the head with a knife before chasing her into a bedroom where he struck her several times with the 20 pound (9 kilogram) barbell.

"It is difficult to imagine a crime more heinous than that of a son viciously attacking his parents and, in the process, fatally beating his mother to death," Brown said.

Anthony has been remanded in custody and faces a maximum of life in prison if convicted.

Whew. Who takes a loss that personally?

You know Hendo, I was in favor of sending him (Flores) to AAA a bit earlier, but I might need to re-think that. I really do love Schneider at backstop, but it seems to me that Flores is quite capable and has a very good arm to throw out runners. He's impressed in a limited roll behind the plate, and his numbers offensively it appears would be quite a jump over what the club is getting now. From everything I've read, Flores is a hard worker and is always tapping higher ups for knowledge. He's a keeper for sure....trade Schneider...now that could be tossed around for some discussion. His clubhouse leadership would be missed for sure, and would assuredly be a plus to any club who has him. With a young staff like the Nats, he certainly seems valuable. Thats why the decision makers make the big bucks.

Whoa...only in New York...I hope! Thats just tragic.

SC Nats Fan comments, re Flores: "He's a keeper for sure....trade Schneider...now that could be tossed around for some discussion." For sure, but it wouldn't be the happiest of discussions, for all the reasons you state.

And because it looks to me like the Nats have two first-line catchers and, save Fick, no one to back them up. Could Schneider and Flores share the duties and the limelight? Could we do with a catcher from the minors -- say, Brito, or Herrera, or Montz, none of whom excite me?

This is sick. Maybe we should trade away a catcher, and trade for a catcher. I may have to go lie down.

Who would have thought a problem like this could/might pop up. Schneider...Flores /// Flores...Schneider /// keep one, or both. Can they share the duties and can they both be content at that? Thats probably doubtful over the long haul...good idea, I'm going to go lie down also.

I'm calming down listening to George Benson riff on "Soulful Strut." It seems to be helping.

I have a whole lot of ideas on 2008 ballpark music, BTW. They might have to wait till another off day, or the offseason, but meantime I'll be working on them in the background.

My gut says keep Flores and Schneider next year. However, the Nats have a problem, in that the will not have a Robert Fick who can do everything next year... so keeping two ONLY CATCHERS could be a problem.

The reason not to trade Schneider is that we're going to have young pitchers next year, and we need a quarterback. The reason not to trade Flores is... well... that would be stupid.

There is no reason to trade Schneider (and probably no market right now). But Flores needs some serious playing time during the next two months so that we can see what he can do on a regular basis.

I would be happy not trading, but I do like the fireworks of a trade. I'd love it if we could give a bunch our coins and get a bill, but I'm afraid we'd be giving away bill(s) to get a bunch of coins.

(maybe that analogy stinks)

Flores was a Rule 5 draft pick - you have to offer him back to the Mets/cant send him directly to AAA - similar to Speigner where we wanted to keep him and traded Darnell McDonald to do so

My first time here so my question is this - Since the Nats, as currently constructed, will not be challenging for any titles, why isnt every player available except your cornerstones?

Why sign Young & Belliard right before the deadline? Sure, they both could be stopgaps before the prospects advance or even 2008 safety nets for injury prone Goose & NJ plus they are fun to watch - But if you have two possible trading chips, why pull them before you need to?

Kasten's Braves were built on the draft, savvy international signings, shrewd trades THEN free agent signings. Glavine, Justice, Schmidt, Wohlers, Javy Lopez, Andruw, Chipper, Avery, Mercker were all Braves prospects through draft/intl signings...traded for Smoltz...then signed Maddux, Pendleton & traded for McGriff

Why are the Nats contracting multiple years to players in their mid 30's at a time when they should be considering trading all their supplemental players? As a result of trading away players for prospects, wouldnt they allow their marginal prospects the opportunity to play in the majors to determine if they are part of the future (Casto, Watson, Broadway)?

If Bowden/Rizzo/Dana Brown skills as talent evaluators are so highly regarded, then why not obtain prospects for relievers whose stats and value are assisted by a ballpark that wont be here next year?

During a month off with surgery, I found watching the Nats on TV a great help in the recovery process. My take on them has changed, too.

The team makes every game a possible win. They play hard and mostly they play well. Perhaps its being in the hotly competitive NL East, but they do not let down. Acta has done a marvelous job in keeping the intensity at a high level.

It's not for me to say, but I do not see how the Nats could trade any pitching and still remain as competitive as they are right now. And right now, they produce a product on the field that is well worth watching. And some modest improvements are likely in 2008.

I hope the short leash Kasten reportedly keeps Bowden on is a real one.