Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Friday, August 17, 2012

Scott Boras on the Nationals: “Rizzo and I put this team together.”

“How about everyone was given notice by Rizzo that this was going to be what the format was,” Boras said. “That he is going to, hopefully, pitch the Nationals into [pennant-winning] position. Rizzo and I put this team together. I got eight or nine guys on the team.”

Another harsh truth: if Rizzo and the Nats didn’t follow this plan, they opened themselves up to serious financial liability and, worse, the real possibility Boras would stop sending the players he represents the Nationals’ way anymore.

You and Rizzo put this team together??  You sanctimonious little P.O.S. you.

Joey B.: posting for the kids of northeast Ohio Posted: August 17, 2012 at 04:44 PM | 54 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: nationals

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. McCoy Posted: August 17, 2012 at 05:56 PM (#4210967)
I don't get the reference.
   2. Mayor Blomberg Posted: August 17, 2012 at 06:02 PM (#4210975)
Maybe it's not a reference, just a pissed-off Nats fan? I mean, I could see that.
   3. Joey B.: posting for the kids of northeast Ohio Posted: August 17, 2012 at 06:10 PM (#4210982)
Yeah, I'm pretty ticked off that this D-bag agent thinks he's running our team now.
   4. Weekly Journalist_ Posted: August 17, 2012 at 06:12 PM (#4210985)
R-I-Z-Z-O! Open yer ####### ears, jackass
   5. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: August 17, 2012 at 06:20 PM (#4211001)
How dare Scotty B. go around talking about the Nationals like he's on the team, or as if their success validates him and his wisdom?
   6. Mayor Blomberg Posted: August 17, 2012 at 06:27 PM (#4211010)
This isn't a new act for him, is it? I think him recalling talking in the past about delivering players and delivering championships. didn't he do that with I-Rod in DET?
   7. Joey B.: posting for the kids of northeast Ohio Posted: August 17, 2012 at 06:41 PM (#4211024)
His act is getting worse and worse with time.
   8. McCoy Posted: August 17, 2012 at 06:43 PM (#4211026)
His act is getting worse and worse with time.

Your team is winning. Who cares?
   9. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: August 17, 2012 at 06:47 PM (#4211030)
Gotta whine about something.
   10. Tripon Posted: August 17, 2012 at 06:49 PM (#4211033)
Its definitely a weird act since he also represent guys who are on last place teams. Like Adrian Beltre and the Mariners, or Oliver Perez and the Mets.

And does he take credit for delivering Derek Lowe to the Braves?
   11. steagles Posted: August 17, 2012 at 06:59 PM (#4211041)
Yeah, I'm pretty ticked off that this D-bag agent thinks he's running our team now.

jayson werth
edwin jackson
stephen strasburg
bryce harper
mike gonzalez
jesus flores
danny espinosa


strasburg, harper, and espinosa were draft picks, though, and jesus flores was taken in the rule 5 draft, so none of them really had a choice, other than going back to school or going back to venezuela.

jayson werth has 1 WAR this year, so he's not exactly a large part of their success.

mike gonzalez was a pickup off the scrapheap. he was probably happy just to have a job, but i guess boras could get some credit for delivering him to the nats.

edwin jackson was just plain offered more money to be a nat, but he's having a good year, besting his career averagees in ERA, K/9, BB/9, and WHIP by significant margins.



so, i'd probably agree with the consensus here that boras is more hat than cattle, in this instance.
   12. The Chronicles of Reddick Posted: August 17, 2012 at 07:05 PM (#4211050)
And this is different than collusion because?
   13. bfan Posted: August 17, 2012 at 07:06 PM (#4211052)
And does he take credit for delivering Derek Lowe to the Braves?


Yes, as a part of his plan to elevate the Nationals.
   14. JJ1986 Posted: August 17, 2012 at 07:10 PM (#4211057)
edwin jackson was just plain offered more money to be a nat, but he's having a good year, besting his career averagees in ERA, K/9, BB/9, and WHIP by significant margins.


His contract is a very good deal for the team. I know he turned down bigger offers.
   15. Chip Posted: August 17, 2012 at 07:17 PM (#4211061)
Applause for #5.
   16.   Posted: August 17, 2012 at 08:33 PM (#4211118)
You sanctimonious little P.O.S. you.

Moneyball can't buy you love (Joey B.)


Oh this is too rich for words.
   17. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 17, 2012 at 08:39 PM (#4211120)
Umm, the point of TFA is that Boras is implying that he might have steered his clients elsewhere if he didn't have a good relationship with Rizzo, and that good relationship is based in large part on the Nats' prioritizing Strasburg's long-term health. Whether he's a sanctimonious little P.O.S. doesn't really enter into it. He actually is in a position to make it either easier or harder for GMs to build their teams.
   18. cardsfanboy Posted: August 17, 2012 at 08:44 PM (#4211128)
Not that ethics apply to agents (in fact it's arguable that they go counter to their job description) but isn't Boras using the word we in reference to the Nationals crossing what little line that might exist?
   19. bfan Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:16 PM (#4211155)
I hope this sort of thing pisses off the emotionless vulcans who run the Braves organization, who then get their back up and don't let Bourne sign with the Boras team in DC. Of course, the brilliant Boras has foreseen this happening, thus driving up the price of his client and once again out-smarting everyone.
   20. Buzzards Bay Posted: August 17, 2012 at 10:08 PM (#4211166)
#12 no one seems to want to go there
the fossil record of that dynamic
ends up at a SCOTUS blog
   21. Howie Menckel Posted: August 17, 2012 at 10:21 PM (#4211168)

Boras to Davey Johnson et al: "You didn't build that."

   22. McCoy Posted: August 17, 2012 at 10:24 PM (#4211170)
I believe the CBA does not allow teams colluding nor players colluding. It says nothing about teams and agents colluding nor teams and players colluding, or so I believe. I believe they call teams and players colluding "free agency negotiations".
   23. Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq. Posted: August 17, 2012 at 10:31 PM (#4211172)
And this is different than collusion because?
Collusion is when the player says "I won't sign with you unless you also sign this guy for at least this much", not when an agent says "I'll advise my clients not to come to your team if you don't treat my clients who are on your team well."

Particularly since every player involved has the right to tell Boras to #### off and sign whatever deal they want.
   24. Mayor Blomberg Posted: August 17, 2012 at 11:10 PM (#4211183)
There's no collusion at all in an agent telling a player that the team he is contemplating signing with has made short-term decisions at the expense of a player's health and career. The phrase you're actually looking for in this case is fiduciary responsibility.
   25. Daunte Vicknabbit! Posted: August 18, 2012 at 12:47 AM (#4211201)
I'm sure Joey is just absolutely enraged by the steroid lab they're cultivating in Washington, with known user Mike Morse rocking out that grand slam.

Oh.
   26. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: August 18, 2012 at 03:33 AM (#4211223)
boras is more hat than cattle


I had never heard this expression before, but I like it, and plan to use it in the future.
   27. joeysdadjoe Posted: August 18, 2012 at 08:41 AM (#4211234)
What Boras means is "You have to put my ability to collect a commision on their FA contracts above your team winning a WS".
   28. TerpNats Posted: August 18, 2012 at 09:09 AM (#4211236)
Boras is more hat than cattle

I had never heard this expression before, but I like it, and plan to use it in the future.
One presumes you've never set foot in Texas. "All hat and no cattle" is a fairly common saying there.

Regarding Boras and the Nationals, the angle is simply he has a good relationship with the team because of its general manager's concern for the long term of Boras' clients. As a Nats fan, who sees the very real possibility that Washington -- the town MLB ignored for decades -- could become the team of the decade with the right break or two, I see nothing wrong with that.
   29. joeysdadjoe Posted: August 18, 2012 at 09:12 AM (#4211237)
Regarding Boras and the Nationals, the angle is simply he has a good relationship with the team because of its general manager's concern for the long term of Boras' clients. As a Nats fan, who sees the very real possibility that Washington -- the town MLB ignored for decades -- could become the team of the decade with the right break or two, I see nothing wrong with that.

I get this but you never know. If I was a Nats fan I would still want to see a strategy where this guy pitches in the playoffs.
   30. TerpNats Posted: August 18, 2012 at 09:25 AM (#4211241)
I get this but you never know. If I was a Nats fan I would still want to see a strategy where this guy pitches in the playoffs.
This isn't an aging team that won't get another chance at the ring; the nucleus is young and, barring an array of injuries, should only get better. You have better chances to win more World Series titles if you keep the window open several years longer. I think for many in D.C., they look at the Capitals as a comparison, and that's apples and oranges.

Also, as I've mentioned before, the Oakland Athletics won it all in 1972 without Reggie Jackson, who was injured in Game 5 of the ALCS and missed the World Series. And while I like Strasburg -- he's only going to get better as he hones his pitching smarts -- with Gonzalez and Zimmermann, not to mention Jackson, Detwiler and even possibly Lannan, the Nats have enough pitching this year to win without him.
   31. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 18, 2012 at 11:32 AM (#4211294)
This isn't an aging team that won't get another chance at the ring; the nucleus is young and, barring an array of injuries, should only get better. You have better chances to win more World Series titles if you keep the window open several years longer. I think for many in D.C., they look at the Capitals as a comparison, and that's apples and oranges.

Also, as I've mentioned before, the Oakland Athletics won it all in 1972 without Reggie Jackson, who was injured in Game 5 of the ALCS and missed the World Series. And while I like Strasburg -- he's only going to get better as he hones his pitching smarts -- with Gonzalez and Zimmermann, not to mention Jackson, Detwiler and even possibly Lannan, the Nats have enough pitching this year to win without him.


Bingo. Even without Strasburg, the Nats are still one of the 2 or 3 best teams in baseball, and probably a slight (relative) favorite to go all the way. I might not say that if I knew that Sabathia and Pettitte were going to be fully healthy in October, but the Strasburgless Nats aren't the only team that's facing potential rotation shortages.

And as much as I generally don't like Boras, I'm glad to know that he's insistent on protecting his clients from some wackass Dibble-type manager** who puts short term success over all other considerations.

**Not that Johnson's like that, but Strasburg's going to be around longer than Johnson.
   32. robinred Posted: August 18, 2012 at 11:32 AM (#4211297)
This isn't an aging team that won't get another chance at the ring;


Ten teams being in the playoffs every year certainly helps their chances, but you have no way of knowing this. Neither does Mike Rizzo.

Also, as I've mentioned before, the Oakland Athletics won it all in 1972 without Reggie Jackson,


Sure, because Gene Tenace hit like Babe Ruth in the Series, and the A's won four one-run games. Also, Jackson was a position player, not a frontline starter. I think most people agree that the latter is probably a bigger deal than the former in a postseason series.

Basically, I think that endorsing this decision means placing an extraordinary faith in Rizzo's judgment about the medical probabilities related to the shutdown and the data/research thereof. That's fine, but as others have noted, there were other ways to do this, like having Strasburg pitch once a week, etc. There is a fine line between "making a decision and sticking with it" and "being inflexible and failing to accommodate changing conditions." I think the Nationals' FO may be on the wrong side of that line here, but we will see.

The Nationals have the best record in MLB and Strasburg is their most talented pitcher. The data would have to be really compelling to make shutting him down and holding him out of postseason worth it. I certainly agree that they should continue to monitor him, etc.
   33. robinred Posted: August 18, 2012 at 11:42 AM (#4211304)
The counterargument, I suppose, is that there is a lot of variance in postseason anyway (ask Gene Tenace) so taking chances with Strasburg isn't worth it. But I don't see it that way; I think an FO needs to maximize shots at the trophy when they occur, within reason.
   34. Joey B.: posting for the kids of northeast Ohio Posted: August 18, 2012 at 12:04 PM (#4211324)
Regarding Boras and the Nationals, the angle is simply he has a good relationship with the team because of its general manager's concern for the long term of Boras' clients. As a Nats fan, who sees the very real possibility that Washington -- the town MLB ignored for decades -- could become the team of the decade with the right break or two, I see nothing wrong with that.

Don't be fooled by this B.S. "I'm your partner" routine he's trying to pull here. If the Nats organization or any of their fans seriously believe for even a second that this obeisance they're now apparently paying to Boras is going to be repaid by him in any way, shape, or form, they are kidding themselves. He doesn't give a fig about this team; he's a lowlife scumbag and he's in this game only to enrich himself.

It looks like you're in bed with the devil now, Rizzo and Lerner. You had better watch your back every second of every day, or you'll come to regret it.
   35. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 18, 2012 at 12:09 PM (#4211326)
No team uses more than four starters in the postseason, and the difference between Strasburg (ERA+ of 136) and Edwin Jackson (the fifth starter, 106 ERA+) would come into play only in the three potential game 4's. Right now a Strasburgless rotation has Zimmerman (166), Detweiler (122) and Gonzalez (120) slotted for 17 out of 20 potential postseason games, with a bullpen that's as good as any team's ready to come into play.

This is also a team that's been averaging over 5 runs a game in the second half of the season, and last night for the first time all year had all of its starting lineup on the field. Rizzo knows all this, and is making the right decision. And can anyone even imagine the reaction if Strasburg went down again next year after trying to get through the playoffs?
   36. cardsfanboy Posted: August 18, 2012 at 12:13 PM (#4211330)
Regarding Boras and the Nationals, the angle is simply he has a good relationship with the team because of its general manager's concern for the long term of Boras' clients. As a Nats fan, who sees the very real possibility that Washington -- the town MLB ignored for decades -- could become the team of the decade with the right break or two, I see nothing wrong with that.


About 15 years ago, you could have swapped out that sentiment with Indians.
   37. robinred Posted: August 18, 2012 at 12:21 PM (#4211332)
And can anyone even imagine the reaction if Strasburg went down again next year after trying to get through the playoffs?


I don't think it would be as bad as it will if

a) Strasburg gets hurt next year in spite of the shutdown
or
b) Detwiler, Gonzalez, or Jackson loses a postseason game that Strasburg might have pitched and the Nationals don't win the World Series in part because of said loss.

Like I said, there is an argument to be made for this move, but IMO it comes down to really, really buying into Mike Rizzo's judgment and what he knows about the medical probabilities. And in your case particularly, since you have scoffed repeatedly at the "postseason is overrated since it is a crapshoot" line, I am a little surprised that you are in favor of it.
   38. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 18, 2012 at 12:40 PM (#4211348)
And can anyone even imagine the reaction if Strasburg went down again next year after trying to get through the playoffs?

I don't think it would be as bad as it will if

a) Strasburg gets hurt next year in spite of the shutdown


Which is less likely to happen than if they don't shelve him soon.

OR
b) Detwiler, Gonzalez, or Jackson loses a postseason game that Strasburg might have pitched and the Nationals don't win the World Series in part because of said loss.


That may be true of the Dibbles or a certain segment of the talk show crowd, but I think you underestimate the respect that most Nats fans have for Rizzo's judgment.

Like I said, there is an argument to be made for this move, but IMO it comes down to really, really buying into Mike Rizzo's judgment and what he knows about the medical probabilities. And in your case particularly, since you have scoffed repeatedly at the "postseason is overrated since it is a crapshoot" line, I am a little surprised that you are in favor of it.

I've often stressed the importance of the postseason in terms of rating the "best" teams, but when I weigh all the relative risks and rewards, I'm glad in this case that the Nats have a GM who's not fixated on short term goals. Not to mention that they're still one of the 2 or 3 best teams in baseball without him, and quite possibly the best.

And since I know what's likely coming next, I'd be saying exactly the same thing if Strasburg were a Yankee.
   39. robinred Posted: August 18, 2012 at 12:48 PM (#4211355)
And since I know what's likely coming next, I'd be saying exactly the same thing if Strasburg were a Yankee.


I actually wasn't going there. I only go there when we talk Lakers/Boston. ;-

Also, I think claiming that they are "still one of the best two or three teams in baseball without him" weakens the case, rather than strengthening it. If the Nats were a borderline contender, a WC team with questionable peripherals that was headed to the play-in game if they got in, I would probably get behind the shutdown. As it is, I think this is sort of like the 1969 Mets shutting down Tom Seaver or Jerry Koosman. No, the 1969 Mets did not have a Bryce Harper, but even with a guy like that, there are no guarantees in baseball.
   40. steagles Posted: August 18, 2012 at 01:00 PM (#4211366)
Like I said, there is an argument to be made for this move, but IMO it comes down to really, really buying into Mike Rizzo's judgment and what he knows about the medical probabilities. And in your case particularly, since you have scoffed repeatedly at the "postseason is overrated since it is a crapshoot" line, I am a little surprised that you are in favor of it.
i actually think it's the opposite of that. i think rizzo is holding to this line because he doesn't have confidence in his knowledge of the impact of the potential increase in workload for strasburg.

if he knew where the risk for injury peaked, then it would be a lot easier to monitor strasburg for signs of fatigue around that point, and shut him down when it becomes necessary.


the fact that rizzo is holding steadfastly to this 180 inning limit, and beyond that, he's also refusing to alter strasburg's workload (not going to a 6 man rotation, or skipping a start here and there, or pulling him after the 4th inning) i think points to the fact that his main interest is in preserving the long term health of strasburg's arm.


   41. Downtown Bookie Posted: August 18, 2012 at 01:07 PM (#4211370)
Scott Boras on the Nationals: “Rizzo and I put this team together.”


Victory has a hundred fathers and defeat is an orphan.


DB
   42. robinred Posted: August 18, 2012 at 01:29 PM (#4211381)
i think points to the fact that his main interest is in preserving the long term health of strasburg's arm


Sure. But if you're right about the rest, then Rizzo doesn't really know enough about how to do that to make the innings limit the last word on how to do that.
   43. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: August 18, 2012 at 02:10 PM (#4211403)
the difference between Strasburg (ERA+ of 136) and Edwin Jackson (the fifth starter, 106 ERA+) would come into play only in the three potential game 4's. Right now a Strasburgless rotation has Zimmerman (166), Detweiler (122) and Gonzalez (120) slotted for 17 out of 20 potential postseason games, with a bullpen that's as good as any team's ready to come into play.


This is only true if you assume that the Nats get to start every series with their rotation lined up perfectly. That's probably out the window as soon as one series goes past four games. If the LDS goes five games, Zimmermann's not available until LCS game three or four. You can easily wind up having to throw your fourth starter in a game seven. If that happens to Washington and Jackson or Detweiler spits the bit, people will want Rizzo's head on a pike.
   44. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 18, 2012 at 02:22 PM (#4211417)
I suspect Boras' comments are mostly after-the-fact puffery designed to make him look good to current and prospective clients - "I'll always have your back"! Boras interests happen to coincide with the Nationals (or what Rizzo thinks the Nationals interests are), that doesn't mean that he drove the decision making.
   45. robinred Posted: August 18, 2012 at 02:30 PM (#4211424)
Tom Seaver or Jerry Koosman


Adding to this, there are obvious differences--that is why I said "sort of."
   46. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 18, 2012 at 02:30 PM (#4211425)
Also, I think claiming that they are "still one of the best two or three teams in baseball without him" weakens the case, rather than strengthening it. If the Nats were a borderline contender, a WC team with questionable peripherals that was headed to the play-in game if they got in, I would probably get behind the shutdown. As it is, I think this is sort of like the 1969 Mets shutting down Tom Seaver or Jerry Koosman. No, the 1969 Mets did not have a Bryce Harper, but even with a guy like that, there are no guarantees in baseball.

OPS+
2012 Nats: 98 and rapidly rising, having averaged over 5 RPG in the second half, and likely to rise a fair amount higher now that for the first time they're playing with their originally projected lineup at full strength.

1969 Mets: 84

ERA+
1969 Seaver 165
1969 Koosman 160
2012 Strasburg 136

Not to mention that Seaver and Koosman were throwing complete games (34 between them), while Strasburg's average outing has been under 6 innings. Plus Washington's pitching beyond Strasburg is much deeper than the Mets' would have been without Seaver or Koosman.

It comes down to measuring unknown long term risk vs marginal (and equally unknown) improvement, and Rizzo made the best decision he could make, knowing what he does and what he doesn't. Erring on the side of caution when you're talking about a 23 year old pitcher less than a year removed from Tommy John surgery seems pretty clearcut to me.
   47. robinred Posted: August 18, 2012 at 02:50 PM (#4211438)
No need for the bold type. I can read numbers.

Like I said in the follow-up post, there are differences--that is why I said "sort of." But I think you are placing too much emphasis on ERA+. Strasburg has the kind of talent to where he could throw a couple of six-inning two-hit shutouts in post-season. I think it is less likely that Detwiler or Jackson do that. Also, since the 1969 Mets had Nolan Ryan as their long man and Tug McGraw as one of their two top relievers, and since Cardwell, Gentry, and McAndrew were all pretty good, I am not sure about the depth assertion.

As to the hitting, I think that, again, any data like OPS+ that shows how good the Nats are weakens the case. As they are serious contenders, the difference between Strasburg and Detwiler could be very meaningful.

But, really, it goes back to how I started this, as this sentence shows:

Rizzo made the best decision he could make, knowing what he does and what he doesn't.


I think you are simply saying, "We should trust Rizzo here since there are all these unknowns."

   48. Mayor Blomberg Posted: August 18, 2012 at 03:33 PM (#4211464)
It's not trust Rizzo, but trust that Rizzo got the best medical advice he could get. And recognize that the advice is necessarily speculative, as are performance projections, as is likelihood of winning in the playoffs. Or did I misremember last year and STL went wire to wire. And allow that that giving preference of the future of a young team and especially a young player is at least a reasonable choice.
   49. robinred Posted: August 18, 2012 at 03:58 PM (#4211476)
It's not trust Rizzo, but trust that Rizzo got the best medical advice he could get. And recognize that the advice is necessarily speculative, as are performance projections, as is likelihood of winning in the playoffs.


Fair enough, but there are some things in this situation that aren't speculative:

The Nationals are a legit contender.
Strasburg is a very talented and effective pitcher, and the guys who will get his innings are not as talented and effective as he is.
You want to go into postseason games using your most talented and effective players in key roles.

And it is unknown whether or when the Nationals will be in this position again, and whether shutting Strasburg down will prevent future injuries, or, perhaps, even what the probabilities surrounding that are.

So, sure, you can say it's a "reasonable choice." But I am not convinced that it's a good one.
   50. Mayor Blomberg Posted: August 18, 2012 at 04:04 PM (#4211480)
Part of the problem with knowing if it's a good choice is not being able to play it out both ways.

Part of it is agreeing to a metric for good. If the Nats win the WS while Strasburg blows out his arm in his WS game, and recovers only to be a league-average or so pitcher, do you think it will have been a good choice to ride him?
   51. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: August 18, 2012 at 04:17 PM (#4211491)
2012 Nats: 98 and rapidly rising, having averaged over 5 RPG in the second half, and likely to rise a fair amount higher now that for the first time they're playing with their originally projected lineup at full strength.


Here's the OPS+ of their current lineup:

141
98
118
116
122
118
99
49
P

Bench: 113, 123, 89, 58, 53.

That's a potent offense.
   52. robinred Posted: August 18, 2012 at 04:29 PM (#4211499)
Part of it is agreeing to a metric for good. If the Nats win the WS while Strasburg blows out his arm in his WS game, and recovers only to be a league-average or so pitcher, do you think it will have been a good choice to ride him
?

Flags fly forever.

Basically, I think the unknowns and knowns are such that the Nats should adjust their decision in some way, so as to allow Strasburg to continue to pitch and to participate in the postseason. Rizzo, obviously, has medical information that has lead him to the opposite conclusion, and he knows much more about this than I do, (or Rob Dibble does) so on that basis, it is reasonable to back him.

But I think it is also reasonable to point out the possible downside of this decision, which I think is pretty substantial, and the structural issues inherent to making it.

Finally, I would assume that if the Nats go through with the shutdown, it will be pretty tough on Strasburg to watch his teammates and buddies go at it for the trophy while he sits in the dugout and/or in the pen, and feels like he can pitch. That is an emotional thing of course, and I am not saying that it should change Rizzo's mind, but I think it's worth remembering.
   53. Mayor Blomberg Posted: August 18, 2012 at 04:49 PM (#4211512)
It won't be easy, and I'm of an age to say that's why these guys need good agents, and in this case I think Boras is doing the right thing. It would be more interesting if Rizzo were to offer, say, $60M over 4 years as an insurance policy should an injury keep Strasburg from a ig FA contract. Sure, there's no guarantee he'll be healthy when that time comes, but if he is it'll be more than 4/60.

This would at least spread the risk.

(&, no, I am neither Jon Heyman nor his sock puppet.)
   54. Joey B.: posting for the kids of northeast Ohio Posted: August 20, 2012 at 12:16 PM (#4212507)
By the way, I'm not quite sure how it is that the Nats team OPS+ is still only 98, considering that their team OPS is .735 and the MLB average OPS is .726. It's not as though Nationals Park is an extreme hitters park or anything.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
cardsfanboy
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogMGL: Which teams are optimizing their lineups?
(18 - 2:41pm, Aug 23)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogOT: Politics, August 2014: DNC criticizes Christie’s economic record with baseball video
(5006 - 2:13pm, Aug 23)
Last: Misirlou's been working for the drug squad

NewsblogPosnanski: The Royals might actually know what they are doing
(109 - 2:13pm, Aug 23)
Last: Shibal

NewsblogBrisbee: Rusney Castillo reminds us how screwed amateur players can be
(30 - 1:54pm, Aug 23)
Last: Bug Selig

NewsblogPete Rose’s Reckless Gamble
(9 - 1:52pm, Aug 23)
Last: BDC

NewsblogFG: Ben Revere and the Emptiest Batting Average Ever
(36 - 1:43pm, Aug 23)
Last: BDC

NewsblogManny Machado Likely Out For Season
(29 - 1:42pm, Aug 23)
Last: Spahn Insane

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - August 2014
(300 - 1:42pm, Aug 23)
Last: smileyy

NewsblogSources:  Cubs cut grounds crew’s hours to avoid paying health benefits
(33 - 1:24pm, Aug 23)
Last: puck

NewsblogLooking past the stat line: Mark Appel
(2 - 1:19pm, Aug 23)
Last: Spahn Insane

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread August, 2014
(515 - 12:45pm, Aug 23)
Last: frannyzoo

NewsblogBA (Badler): Seven Reasons Why MLB’s New International Rules Are Backward
(6 - 11:15am, Aug 23)
Last: puck

NewsblogFG: Brian McCann Probably Couldn’t Be Given Away For Free
(48 - 10:49am, Aug 23)
Last: Ziggy

NewsblogDowney: Let Pete Rose in the Hall of Fame already
(91 - 10:15am, Aug 23)
Last: Bourbon Samurai in Asia

NewsblogDRays Bay: Rays to Montreal? “Smart chronicler” says yes
(37 - 8:36am, Aug 23)
Last: RMc's desperate, often sordid world

Page rendered in 0.6602 seconds
52 querie(s) executed