Dave - condolences on Vandy, wild bracket there. Of course, my Illini missed the tourney all together so my sympathy is limited this year.

Pitching. You said here and in the paper today that the Nats don't need a 5th starter until the 13th but Barry explained patiently how they need one on the 6th or else the #4 has to go on 3 days rest.

1) is it still the plan to use a #5 on the 6th?

2) Will Hill be ready to pitch?

3) Can he come off the 15 day then since he started it in spring training?
thanks.

To Avar: All the Nationals have said is that they have targeted April 13 for Hill's first start. I took this to mean they will ask a couple of guys to pitch on short rest (for example, on April 6) in the meantime, but I suppose they could also call up someone for a spot-start. But yes, Hill would be eligible to come off the DL by the 13th.

Thanks for the Info Dave,

In watching Chico yesterday I thought he was much better than last year with his Fastball hitting 89MPH and he was not throwing across his body near as much as the old motion. Chico with a 90 MPH fastball is a big difference than Chico with an 85 MPH fastball.....No?

Before you go....(or not please) could talk a bit about how the rest of MLB feels about the NATS talent on the likely MLB roster. From what XM and other all baseball outlets seem to be saying.....they see "a small increase in runs scored this year and same problems with starting pitching" from Buck M on XM and a feeling that last years record may be the high water mark for the next year or two, what do you hear from the scouts and GMs about Nats progress?

To JayB: Yes, the difference between 85 and 90 mph is quite significant. But it's more than that -- the same additional torque that allows for the increase in fastball velocity also brings added depth and bite to Chico's curveball, which he is throwing again this spring (and effectively) after shelving it three years ago.

What I hear from scouts and others around baseball, in general, is that the Nats are vastly more talented this year, but with more questions about prolonged health (Shawn Hill, Nick Johnson, Dmitri Young, Cristian Guzman, Paul Lo Duca, etc.) and character (Elijah Dukes, Lastings Milledge, Felipe Lopez, etc.) For better or worse, that seems to be the perception out there. In other words, if these key players stay healthy and/or out of trouble, the team could show some serious improvement.

As for pitching, I hear folks rave all the time about the Nationals' bullpen, but for the most part there is equal skepticism about the rotation. And I also never hear anything but praise for Manny Acta.

Dave, why is the organization so opposed to Felipe starting? I don't think he can have another all-star season, but if he is atleast having a good season it's better than Belliard (because he gives you the SB/leadoff element).

Forgot to ask --- did they atleast try to trade for Whitney? BA ranked him among the Top 20 Nats prospects.

and what about G. Guzman?

thanks Dave.

Your question sounds as if they lost him back to Cleveland already. I can't find any record/announcement to that effect. Do you have a link?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Forgot to ask --- did they atleast try to trade for Whitney? BA ranked him among the Top 20 Nats prospects.

and what about G. Guzman?

Posted by: Andrew Stebbins | March 22, 2008 09:44 AM

So, the general opinion from the pros is not vastly different than the opinion of most of the posters on this board (sans the snarkiness about the Lerners, the Oriole nonsense, and a very few unrealistic trade proposals).

In other words, we actually make sense, except that we do tend to be just a tad optimistic. But then it's Spring and the crocuses and forsythia are beginning to bloom. Also, I can now open my windows over night and listen to that bird that drags his complete Audio system into my neighborhood.

Can't see how they could trade Lopez. Lousy season last year, lousy spring, lousy attitude, $4.9m salary and F/A after '07. Who would want that? They could trade Belly easy but why? I was surprised he signed for so low. Prediction, Lopez will never again make as much as he does this year.

If his attitude and production stay where they are, I predict they will release him. Even then, he would have a hard time getting picked up. My guess would be for like 1 yr @ $850k or less.

If you were Lopez and had the year he had last year and got a $1m raise!!!! wouldn't you be groveling before Bowden and Acta on your knees? I mean he is a F/A after this year, he needs to shut his mouth and play his ass off and win these guys over so he can keep making this money.

Just don't get it.

The Cubs have some pretty nice prospects they were willing to trade for Roberts. Belliard ain't Roberts, but he ain' shabby either, so why not trade Belliard, eat a year of Lopez and then find help in the off-season. The difference between Belliard and Lopez is not going to deny us the playoffs, the Cubs might think otherwise. And Dave, be glad for Lannan's Siena team.

If the Cubs were to offer enough in trade for either Belliard or Lopez, don't think for a second that JBow won't pull the trigger on it. Belliard would obviously cost more in return than Lopez would at this point but as it's been said, he's perhaps the only viable trade candidate between the two right now.

There are only perhaps 2 or 3 guys on the big league roster who they would consider "off the table" (Zimm, Lastings... honestly can't think of a 3rd so that should tell you something too).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Cubs have some pretty nice prospects they were willing to trade for Roberts. Belliard ain't Roberts, but he ain' shabby either, so why not trade Belliard, eat a year of Lopez and then find help in the off-season. The difference between Belliard and Lopez is not going to deny us the playoffs, the Cubs might think otherwise. And Dave, be glad for Lannan's Siena team.

Posted by: Cindy Lou | March 22, 2008 10:13 AM

I saw the headline on Boswell's column this morning ("Far From a Case of Dogging It") and thought, oh good, he's weighing in on the Lopez situation or maybe addressing the Patterson release even though it's day-old news now. But NOOOO! He's down in Raleigh covering the NCAA tourney. I guess he's decided late in his career that he wants to branch out. First he's a Gibbsologist, now he's bracket boy. More likely, Senor Garcia-Ruiz made the decision for him. I agree that the tourney is the big story of the day, Emilio, and you need to pull in reinforcements from all over to cover it. So you've got your baseball guys in on it, your soccer guy in on it, and damn those Caps for having a game so you couldn't pull in Tarik too. But what about the Redskins guys, Emilio? Are they all on 24-hour watch in case Jim Zorn forgets the team's colors again? What about Kornheiser? He talks basketball all the time on George Michael's show and always tells George he still works for the Post. All those resources around, yet you need to pull two of your four baseball guys off the sport during a critical time leading into the season.

Sure would be nice to have more than one voice in the Post reporting and opining on the Nationals when so much is going on with the team, wouldn't it? But what am I saying? The coverage is fine.

I saw the headline on Boswell's column this morning ("Far From a Case of Dogging It") and thought, oh good, he's weighing in on the Lopez situation or maybe addressing the Patterson release even though it's day-old news now. But NOOOO! He's down in Raleigh covering the NCAA tourney. I guess he's decided late in his career that he wants to branch out. First he's a Gibbsologist, now he's bracket boy. More likely, Senor Garcia-Ruiz made the decision for him. I agree that the tourney is the big story of the day, Emilio, and you need to pull in reinforcements from all over to cover it. So you've got your baseball guys in on it, your soccer guy in on it, and damn those Caps for having a game so you couldn't pull in Tarik too. But what about the Redskins guys, Emilio? Are they all on 24-hour watch in case Jim Zorn forgets the team's colors again? What about Kornheiser? He talks basketball all the time on George Michael's show and always tells George he still works for the Post. All those resources around, yet you need to pull two of your four baseball guys off the sport during a critical time leading into the season.

Sure would be nice to have more than one voice in the Post reporting and opining on the Nationals when so much is going on with the team, wouldn't it? But what am I saying? The coverage is fine.

Dave, is there any sense that the team would entertain trading Guzman and keeping Felipe?

I don't understand why the conversation seems to be Felipe vs. Belliard. Exactly why is Guzman not in this mix to be traded? Guzman has played only about 40 games at most in the past two years, and was horrendous in his only full year here in DC. I know Guzman is hitting .350, but if he is out for the season in early May with a good average, what good is he? If Felipe is traded and Guzman goes down again (which likely could happen), who plays short?

Honestly just give us Dave and we get an improvement over Barry and Boz.

Before all you Barry sycophants start getting all offended......I think Barry was great when vested in the Nats beat but take a good hard look at what Dave has been doing in 48 hours and what Barry has done this Off Season and Spring Training....at this point Barry is just phoning it in anyway (literally at times!).

you may have missed it before, cindylou, but there's no reason for the cubs to trade for belliard/lopez. they have a 2B who's as good or better than either of them, mark derosa. they were looking to trade for roberts to both acquire a top quality leadoff hitter (which neither belliard nor lopez is) and to improve offensively on derosa (which neither belliard or lopez is).

to the comment of lopez as leadoff hitter, the only leadoff attribute he has is some SB capability. but he doesn't get on base very well and he doesn't take a whole lot of pitches, and both of those are more important qualities of a leadoff hitter, imo. who cares if you can steal a base if you struggle to get on base to begin with. and he's not a particularly prolific basestealer, one who scares pitchers, either. i doubt he's much, if any, better at SBs than milledge will be. and i think milledge will have better OBP. and even then, milledge is a better #2. lopez is a better #7,8,9 right now.

Ray, you make an excellent case for why Guzman can't be traded.

Did I miss it but any word on how the Reds grievance was decided. Maybe we can give Flop back to the Reds.

The problem is not so much what to do about Felipe Lopez -- that problem is contained to 2008 -- but what to do about a SS backup now if they lose him, and what about a starting SS long-term, 2009-(?)2013, 1014. Ain't got no. A couple of maybes in the the low minors, last I looked.

231, I think LMilz will be a MUCH better threat on base than anyone else they have now. The guy explodes off first. If he can learn to read pitchers, he will be stunning.

Dave: Since you're on the scene, what's the weather outlook for this afternoon's game at Space Coast Stadium?

CE, you're right, he could be very good at SBs. regardless of potential, i think he's already better than flopez. my guess is he's still a 20/20 guy, but maybe he surprises people and turns into a 20/30 or 25/40.

New post -- actual baseball topic, too!

Don't worry 419, Boz will be back on the baseball beat soon...for about a week, until he goes down to Augusta to write a column per day about the Masters.

The Post would be better off with a fresh baseball columnist anyway--someone who gives real opinions based on reporting and investigation, and who writes about and opines on what is actually *going on* in the here and now. It sure would be nice to see someone do a little work and investigation and then give us his views on the Patterson situation for example, or about Lopez. That's what *real* columnists do. As opposed to Boz, who does little more than reminisce about the past or ruminate about the future with his useless, once-weekly columns.

Maybe Sheinin can become a columnist and give us some real information and opinions. It's not like Garcia-Ruiz gives him much opportunity to write articles on the baseball beat anyway.

I think Milledge is 20/20 capable now. He's young, he's going to fill out, learn more -- if that goes well, and he stays healthy, I think Mets fans could be talking about this trade the way Cubs fans talk about Ernie Broglio. But hey, no pressure. ; )

There will be no trade! Neither Belliard nor Lopez nor Guzman will be traded. They all will be on the opening day roster, Belliard and Guzman starting, and Lopez on the bench. The Nats' crack staff - especially Manny Acta - will have a serious sit down with Lopez, and he will understand his situation: valued as back-up infielder, get above the Mendoza line, and start cutting down on errors, you will get your chance to compete, shut up and work like all the others. His agent is a jerk.

Johnbear has a point--we've been seriously deficient in criticizing agents lately.

We've ragged on The Post, on Barry, on Boz; on the football team, its fans, its name, and its owner; on the Other lOcal baseball team, its fans, and its Owner; the national anthem, Screech (named for that fingernails-on-a-blackboard sound, but I digress); we've called Felipe Lopez everything but a Child of God; and we haven't eased up much on one another.

So let 'er rip. Bore us with Boras.

Just got back from Viera last night.

Two highlights --

First, I'm standing at the counter in the team store Thursday night and suddenly Milledge ducks in through the back door, in full uniform (this is like 30 minutes before gametime) and asks the cashier where he can find an ATM machine. He leaves after being informed that there is one behind a nearby door. "Did that just happen?" I asked the cashier. She replies, "I think he's supposed to know that." (I'm not trying to imply anything negative about Milledge here, just relaying the story.)

On Friday, my daughters and I are watching a Hanrahan bullpen session when Spin Williams drives up in his golf cart. He stops to say hello to the girls on his way to see Joel and Jesus Colume, who is also throwing nearby. Then he goes out of his way, driving around the outfield and digging through bags in the bullpen, to find two baseballs to give to my kids. A surprising and kind gesture from a class act.

OK, enough human interest, time for some baseball comments.

Patterson -- in hindsight maybe we can all say this wasn't a shock. There was the GM who said he looked like he was holding back and pitching hurt. There were numerous hints that he was marching to his own drummer and not doing what the team asked him to do. But an outright release? C'mon, nobody saw that coming. For all of the legitimate doubts about his health, the prevailing (optimistic) view here was that he was potentially the opening day starter and the #1-#2 guy in the rotation. We just lost that, and I think that's a big deal. Maybe it's not a surprise, in hindsight, that he couldn't make it all the way back. But it is clearly a disappointment, in my view, and I strongly disagree with those who have said, essentially, "good riddance." Having just seen a lot of these guys up close, I am reminded that at the end of the day they're just young guys trying to compete at the highest level of a challenging and complicated game. In general I think we are are far too quick to blame failures on some kind of character flaw.

Now, with that said, from a Plan perspective, if the Nats baseball folks have concluded that Matt Chico gives us a better chance to win a game right now than John Patterson, then this move makes sense. But that doesn't mean it's not a blow to the potential strength of our 2008 rotation. We were hoping for the 2005 version of John Patterson, and now we have the 2008 version of Matt Chico and/or John Lannan. I'll be rooting on the young lefties, to be sure, but that's not the same thing.

Lopez/Belliard -- sure looks to me like the job is Ronnie's. Sure, he may lack the (theoretical) upside that Lopez has, but I think competence is highly underrated. Belly is loose, competent, confident, and makes the right plays at the right times. I think he's a veteran presence in the lineup and in the locker room. But I also think we should hang onto Lopez. He may still have a key role to play here, whether it's Guzman insurance or in a pinch-hitting/pinch-running/double-switch role off the bench. At this point I'd like to see the Nats give him an assignment he's likely to succeed with (i.e., something other than "leadoff hitter and everyday starting 2b/ss") and then see if he can build on that.

This team has, hands down, the best bullpen in baseball. Wait until the dog months of Summer, everyone, Bowden will pillage some team who's willing to overpay for one of those studs we trot out. And what's better, we have two or three guys in AAA that have pitched even better than the guys who will make the Opening day staff. Schroder could close for at least five MLB squads now (Indians?), and he's going to New Orleans.

As for Millz, I look at him and think somewhere around Garrett Anderson as far as a realistic ceiling goes (maybe less pop). No complaints for what the Mets were compensated with. Church is too selfish, and worse makes his agitations public, and Schneider would have been gone in two years anyway. Hope Dukes or Pena pans out and wait for these young arms to either solidify the rotation or be the bait to get the bats we may need.

And two years, fellow Natty fans, is when this team is going to be a bona fide postseason threat. Just enjoy the progress in the meantime.

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.