Decent pickup. Can't wait for the season.

For a one year contract, $5 million is about right for a guy of Lo Duca's accomplishment.

Lastings should lead off. He's had good BB numbers in the minors. He can run and won't clog the bases. SB's are overrated. However Nick or the Hook need to bat higher. While I think too much is being made of the lack of LH hitters - they'll have three v RHP - they shouldn't have that many RH batters in a row. Casey Stengel used to say to never have three in a row. I'd go with something like this:

9/8 Milledge
4 Lopez
5 Zim
7 Pena
3 Young/Johnson
8/9 Dukes/Kearns
2 Lo Duca
6 Guzman

They really need one more LH hitting substitute so that when they rest Lopez or Guzman and play Belliard, they can get one more LH bat in the line up.

Position player wise, we're looking at

C: Flores, Lo Duca

INF: Johnson, Young, Belliard, Lopez, Guzman, Boone

OF: Dukes, Pena, Kearns, Milledge

The last spot would go to a LH hitting OF - Langerhans, the rule V guy who's name escapes me at the moment, or someone else.

You mean me.

you may also be forgetting about Zim and/or the other rule 5 guy whose name escapes me at the moment

I'd still be more comfortable with an emergency catcher/LH PH bench guy. Flores is still in beta, Lo Duca is capable of getting tossed from any given game, and anybody can get hurt. If one of them bangs into Kearns, they don't even have anyone at Columbus as a reasonable month-long stopgap backup, last I looked.
Got Lo Duca, Ok, fine. Don't stop.

Swell red carpet you got here.

"Position player wise, we're looking at

C: Flores, Lo Duca

INF: ZIMMERMAN, WHITNEY, Johnson, Young, Belliard, Lopez, C. Guzman, Boone

OF: Dukes, Pena, Kearns, Milledge, G. GUZMAN
THAT'S FIFTEEN RIGHT THERE.

The last spot would go to a LH hitting OF - Langerhans, the rule V guy who's name escapes me at the moment, or someone else.

Posted by: #4 | December 10, 2007 08:29 PM

#4 you forgot Zimmerman in your infield.

We're going to have to make some tough decisions to get to 13 position players. We for sure have to keep 2 catchers. Baring a trade or continued injury problems for Nick and Guzman we'll have 7 infielders (Johnson, Young, Belliard, Lopez, Guzman, Zimmerman & Boone) so we can only carry 4 outfielders and Dukes, Pena, Milledge and Kearns are all righties so I'm guessing somebody ends up in AAA (Mr. Dukes you have a tag in your locker....)

I have a tough time imagining any of the rule 5 pickups making the roster so Bowden will probably try some return and trade deals like we did last year.

So, since I know you don't think they'll break camp with only ten pitchers (do you?),
gotta lose at least one of these guys.
Personally, I think injuries will take that job off JimBow's hands by March 30, but let's be optimistic.
Gotta be Lastings. Sucks but nothing else makes sense, short of a trade (which is at least as likely as injuries, I figure).

So either Flores is "long term" or something else is cooking. But it's too soon to determine if Flores is long term.

Yeah... i was too lazy to look it up... thanks. I agree we need more in the catcher department. Best case, Lo duca turns himself into a type A or B free agent and waives arbitration and we get some picks. Maybe next we can draft a catcher and some middle infield help for the minors... after pitching pitching pitching of course

I figure Milledge, and at least one more now that you mention it, on the assumption they wouldn't draft a rule 5 guy, and then not even break spring training with him. But that does leave a tight spot on the 25-man. So maybe they really did feel they could flush $25K just to see if either guy wows 'em.

Well, we paid $5 mill when Toronto offered $3 mill to platoon with Zaun. Hmmm, definate overpay, and no this is NOT just like Detroit when they got I-Rod. Schneider had better OBP numbers last year, we're NOT improved at the bat with him.

Now we have a division with all the speed burners (Rollins, Victorino, Reyes, Hanley) and a catcher who can't throw any one out plus who shows good judgment by cheating on his Playboy model wife with teenagers.

This is a definite minus for Bowden/Kasten.

Who? Zimmerman? Does he play for the Nationals?

So... the corrected version would be

C: Flores, Lo Duca

INF: ZIMMERMAN, WHITNEY, Johnson, Young, Belliard, Lopez, C. Guzman, Boone

OF: Dukes, Pena, Kearns, Milledge, G. GUZMAN

Let's say they keep 11 pitchers. I guess Whitney goes. I cannot believe they'll cut Boone. I suppose that Johnson may not be ready, so Whitney might start on the big league roster. I just think that Nats fans are a little spoiled after the Flores experience. Most of the Rule V guys don't stick.

Of course what credibility do I have left? I forgot Zimmerman. Geez Louise.

This could be really ugly, or really interesting. Suppose either of the Rule 5 guys can catch in an emergency?

Pena, Milledge/Dukes, Kearns
Zimm, C Guzman, Lopez, Young
Lo Duca
Hill

Belliard, Johnson, Boone, Dukes/Milledge, Flores
Patterson, Chico, Bergman, Clippard
Rivera, King, Colome, Ayala, Rausch, Cordero

that's a pretty big "suppose" there, CE. presume it's not accurate. ;)

my guess is that the FO is presuming NJ will be on the DL when the seasons opens, which wouldn't surprise me at all.

I think #4 has it right. There's no way Milledge is going anywhere. They didn't give up Schneider and Church for a guy to play in AAA. He's going to start in Center or Left, with Pena in the other spot. Dukes should be the 4th OF/platoon with Milledge and/or WMP. One of the lefties will be the 5th OF...depends on who has the better ST, I guess. But I'd bet Guzman ends up with the job. He seems to have more upside than Langerhans, and they can send Langerhans to AAA without losing anything.

There's a glut in the infield. Agree that Whitney seems like the odd man out...unless Nick is going to miss a lot more time. It wouldn't surprise me to see Jim and Stan make some more moves...but I don't see how they can get rid of Meathook, since he's playing the mentor role to Dukes...and to a certain extent, Milledge. At this point, I doubt they could get anything for Nick, so maybe one of the middle guys goes, but they would still need a backup middle infielder, so, like I said, looks like Whitney doesn't have much chance of sticking, unless Nick is going to be out a lot longer than we think.

...or im hurting more then anyone is letting on... lets hope im okay

All I can say about that, Zim, is that you certainly didn't have a bad year last year for a guy who was playing through this injury, so I'm not too concerned about you being ready for ST. Power may be down for a while, but the new ballpark should make up for some of that. NJ's health and the starting pitching have me far more concerned, frankly.

I think we should be somewhat honest with ourselves.

- we're not carrying 5 outfielders. We didn't have 5 outfielders the whole of last season. Its going to take an injury for Logan or Langerhans to make this roster.
- We are going to have 12 pitchers. We need that deep of a bullpen unless we magically get more starters that can get through 5 innings on less than 100 pitchers.
- I think you can pencil in Johnson, Patterson and Wagner to start the season on 15-day DL.

I still see two needs on this roster: starting pitching and a leadoff hitter. CGuzman actually had a .380 OBP and would be ideal to start at leadoff, but gets few stolen bases.

Perfect trade: we move FLopez and Cordero for a Jamie Carroll type and a starter. Then we start Guzman and Belliard, have our two backups in the acquisition and Boone and then think about re-signing Fick for a lefty bat who can catch in a pinch.

Then we'd have a pitching corps like this:
Rotation: Hill, Chico (L), Bergmann, Lannan (L) and new guy
Pen: Rivera, Colome, Schroeder, King, Ayala setsup and Rauch closes (or vice versa, i think Ayala is a better arm).

OF: Pena, Milledge, Kearns with dukes on the bench
Inf: Zim, CGuzman, Belliard, Young and Lo Duca with Flores, Boone, new guy and CGuzman or Fick on the bench.

not a bad team.

Makes sense, 131. I was mostly thinking about LH bench bats, and it seems we'd want to keep Langerhans (doubtful) or GGuzman (more likely) for that reason. But, depending on how the rest of the offseason moves go, the Nats could go with four OF, depending.

i don't see why everyone judges only paul lo duca on his last season. don't forget that he hit .318/.355/.428 the year before. that's about seven million times better than schneider. schneider's best season was 2005 when he hit .268/.330/.409...which is worse than lo duca's career AVERAGE of .288/ .338/.414.

I'm not concerned about Lo Duca because of his offensive stats. I'm concerned about the effect his presence in the clubhouse will have on Milledge, who, presumably we brought to DC so get could thrive away from the distractions he had in NY. Lo Duca, allegedly, was one of those distractions. Not thinking about the numbers, just about the effect that a guy that has no future with the club will have on a player that could be one of the cornerstones for the next decade, if he thrives.

Manny was with the mets in 2006 with both Millage and Lo Duca. If he thought there would be any problem with Lo Duca, I don't think he would be here.

PLAY BALL.....I'm stoked.

You got me there, kgwcoach. Maybe my worries are unfounded. I sure hope so. I'll try to give Manny the benefit of the doubt. He deserves it.

Yeah, the "suppose" was "do you suppose," rather than "what if."
I don't figure Nick or Patterson to stay off the DL long, but they SAY these guys will be ready to go for spring. I can't see Nick being read to start, though. In fact, he may need a few game ABs in Harrisburg.
I like the idea of Guzzie leading off, what with his having something to prove. Stolen bases are not much part of Manny's game in any case.
If this isn't clearer in late March, that'll be a good problem.

We could do a whole lot worse.

I like the plan 131 but right now i dont see us getting much for lopez and the chief, definitely not a quality starting pitcher. I think we're best keeping lopez and seeing if him and guz can perform. If not then its a lost cause and we let them go at the end of the season. If we can get a fair trade for lopez's potential then trade away, but right now these guys will need to prove themselves. I would love to have some backups at catcher and middle infield in the upper minors or something but i dont mind a linup like:

milliage
lopez
zim
young
pena
kearns
loduca
guz

or if guz can produce like last season maybe

guz
milliage
zim
young
pena
kearns
loduca
lopez

i think loduca may be better then last year, but not much better, guzman can be somewhere between 2005 and 2007, and lopez can be somewhere around 2006.

The pitching staff will probably resemble that of last season, hopefully we can scrape together some reliable starters and see what everyone's got to offer. I think this team can be a lot of fun to watch and as long as we start to look like a finished product by the end of the season its a vast upgrade over the last few years.

I think Lo Duca is more likely to bat second than Lopez. I hope Tom Boswell's excitement about Lo Duca has a basis.

Well, Lo Duca the FO wanted and Lo Duca the FO got. Forgive me for not getting overly excited and for not jumping onto the "proven major leaguer" bandwagon. (The long offseason will at least me a chance to step back from my discomfort, and my fellow posters a chance to try to beat some sense into my head.)

I like Sec131's thinking, not that I'm in despair about the rotation as it currently exists.

Part of the wisdom of Sec131's trade suggestion revolves around whether Patterson starts '08 on the DL. I don't want to get anyone back onto their soapbox, but if that turns out to be the case and we're not hearing about it now, I'd sure wonder why.

While I could complain about MASN (and will in a future Post, I really find the coverage of the Nationals in the Washington Post to be quite satisfactory. Here we are in December and we are getting coverage through newsprint/web, NJ Blog, and Washington Post live. Tom Boswell has written about the team at least twice in the last two weeks.

Bosewell gave us a glimpse into his philosophy many years ago with his fine book "Life Begins on Opening Day". His columns still seem to reflect the hopeful outlook encapsulated in that book. It is an entirely appropriate perspective for covering baseball.

This editorial foundation is supported by Barry Svruluga's diligent reporting which does a fine job of focusing on verifiable facts. His book "Nationals Pastime" which chronicled the 2005 season is exactly what you would want from a beat reporter. Facts, explanation, and insight.

Dave Sheinin rounds out the top three with a 360 view of major league baseball that helps put the Nationals in context with the rest of the industry.

All are excellent writers.

I do not agree with those who advocate for a more adversarial or investigative journalitic focus aimed at sensationalism or expose. I do not want my coverage to be looking for backbiting snippets from one player about another. I'm not looking for the media to expose Stan Kasten or Mark Lerner as shameless capitalists. I have no need to know the specifics of Mitchell Page's struggles.

I do revel in news about the players, the plays, the acquisitions, the hot stove rumors, the ball park progress, team marketing, and the like.

So, while I am always hungry for more, it would certainly be inaccurate for me to express any disappointment in the lack of coverage. I'm satisfied. I come back looking for more everyday, but I'm satisfied. Thank you.

- NB

What we learned from the Post this morning:

1. Lo Duca is a well respected clubhouse guy by at least one "winner" - Tom Glavine.

2. Nick Johnson will be ready for spring training.

3. The Post will spend space on a column written about the Nats in the off season - a column which deals with clubhouse issues no less.

All good news. I'm on the sunny side of the street this morning.

So essentially it was Schneider and Church for Milledge and Lo Duca. That doesn't make that Nats a better team in 2008. It comes down to Flores' and Milledge's potential upsides in future years.

Not to be negative, but:

1. Most of Lo Duca's offensive value is his BA. He has no pop, and doesn't walk that much. He had the same number of RBIs last year as Schneider, hitting behind Jose Reyes who must have been on second or third on his own 100 times last year.

2. How many catchers improve as hitters at age 36? He's in the decline phase of his career. I don't think last year was an aberration.

3. He's not an outstanding defensive catcher.

Is this an improvement over Flores playing every day here? We already know that Flores likely has more power than Lo Duca and throws better. Of course, it's also likely that he would strike out 150 times in 120 starts & Lo Duca doesn't take enough pitches to do anything like that.

my only disappointment in bos's column is the fact that he completely ignored the issues between milledge and loduca last year. i think it would have been at least worth mentioning.

I've been very pleasantly surprised with the winter coverage in the Post. I'd expected a long cold drought but instead have enjoyed regular stories about and analysis of the rather active Nats offseason. I have no idea how all this will play out next spring, but I've been inspired to spring for partial season tickets! (One of these days I hope to even be told where in the new park my seats might be located.)

MASN really stinks, though. I watched a college hoops game there this weekend, and the poor quality of their transmission is sadly evident. It is pathetic that DC and Baltimore are the only MLB markets without HD broadcasts. Not that one should expect anything other than the absolute lowest class performance of Peter the Awful... It could be worse, I suppose. He owns our broadcast rights, but at least not our team. The Nats should be paid compensation for potential viewers lost due to MASNs technically outmoded broadcasts.

"my only disappointment in bos's column is the fact that he completely ignored the issues between milledge and loduca last year. i think it would have been at least worth mentioning."

I guess his guest columnist this morning, aka his only source, aka Tom Glavine, wasn't aware of those issues, eh?

My question after reading this morning's Boswell column: Is Glavine's phone number the only one in Boswell's cell phone, or just the first one that happened to pop up when he decided to research his column? Glavine's insights were nice to read, but a broader perspective of opinion would have been much better. What of, as you mentioned, the issues that have been rumored between LoDuca and Milledge? What of Bill Ladson's recent criticism of the clubhouse leadership provided (or not provided) by Schneider over the past several years? Presumably Ladson as a beat reporter has spent much more time in the Nats' clubhouse than Boswell ever has or ever will, so if he's throwing dirt like that out there regarding Schneider, its validity at least ought to be examined rather than just blithely being ignored or dismissed. Wouldn't it have been prudent for Boswell to get some background from current or former Nats and Mets players (other than just Glavine) on the clubhouse personas of both LoDuca and Schneider before laying out his own personal opinion of the switch in catchers in this morning's column?

Barry has a new post up.

Lo Duca's 2007 OPS+: 80
Schneider's 2007 OPS+: 77

If you want to make the case the Nats flipped Schneider and an extra outfielder for a great prospect and replaced his bat with the same 2008 salary figure, great. But let's be honest -- we've gone from one overpaid/ underperforming catcher to another.

419-1: I think quoting a future hall of famer who ought to know a good catcher and a good clubhouse presence when he sees one is good enough. If Tom Glavine vouches for him, do I really need Billy Wagner's comments? I think it is spurious to assume Boswell did not do adequate due diligence before writing his column. No footnotes or bibliography are required.

"I think it is spurious to assume Boswell did not do adequate due diligence before writing his column. No footnotes or bibliography are required."

Okay, so am I then supposed to take Ladson's comments about Schneider and the rumors about clubhouse friction between LoDuca and Milledge at face value, or do I discount them? If Boswell is such an esteemed commenter, such a sage, so "must read" that every column he writes merits a personal recommendation from Barry Svrluga himself, shouldn't his opinions at least be informed by the realization that others from both organizations and the media covering those organizations might not agree entirely with what his single Hall-of-Famer source is telling him? I certainly wouldn't expect Boswell to give undue weight to other perspectives aside from those of his sources, but when they differ so greatly from what his sources are telling him, he ought to at least be acknowledging the existence of those other trains of thought in his column. Again I must ask, is what I learn from reading sources other than Boswell irrelevant? The more that Boswell acknowledges that he is aware of and has considered thoughts and opinions that may differ from those he is presenting himself, the more credibility his own thoughts and opinions will have in the eyes of his readers - or at least those of us that don't just automatically genuflect at every word Thomas Boswell writes just because it was Thomas Boswell who wrote it.

Um, actually Boz writes an opinion colum. His opinion. So no, I don't think we need footnotes from him or a treatise on opposing views--although I expect he considered them before reaching his own conclusions. His creds as a preeminent baseball columnist, if not THE preeminent baseball columnist, have been years in the making and will suffice for me. Except if I disagree with him, of course, at which point he instantaneously transforms from sage to village idiot :)

"So no, I don't think we need footnotes from him or a treatise on opposing views--although I expect he considered them before reaching his own conclusions."

How do we know he's even aware of them if he doesn't even mention that they exist? That's all I'm saying he needs to do. No treatises or analysis required at all. One sentence is all it would take. Oh, but then he might not have had room for that sentence with his pipe dream of the Nats picking up Brian Roberts, with nothing of substance to support it. Never mind. He's obviously a genius.

Barry has more posts up from his undisclosed location...

I see it looking like this come MARCH 30th-

Lopez 2b s
Lo Duca c r
Zimmerman 3b r
Johnson 1b l
Kearns rf r
Pena lf/r OR Milledge cf r
Milledge cf/ r OR Dukes lf/r
Belliard 2b r
p
Bench:
D. Young (s), A. Boone (r), Pena OR Dukes(r), J. Flores (r), R. Langerhans OR G. Guzman (l)

S. Hill r
J. Patterson r
M. Chico l
J. Bergmann r
J.Lannan/R. Detwiler/C. Balester

C. Cordero (cl)
J. Rauch
L. Ayala
R. King (l)
S. Rivera
R. Wagner
C. Schroder

Abviously I tweaked some things. Im assumed Lopez gets moved. I also think they will retain Colome, who you will notice isn't in the bullpen I designed, but I think will be on Colombus...or Wagner if he needs the time to rehab, which is a likely scenario too.

I think Whitney will be retained through a trade, and if Langerhans beats out Guzman for the 5th OF spot then they will trade for him too.

Just what I think on December 11th. Could change at any minute.

Substitute Guzman leading off instead of Lopez on my lineup. Not that I want him to.

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.