BOSTON — Bryce Harper favors action over stagnancy, the inclination of youth, and by late Sunday afternoon he could wait no longer. He had blown bubbles and watched for six innings, a foreign experience after 37 games in the major leagues. He marched down the tunnel and straight toward Manager Davey Johnson and told him he was fine. He then repeated himself: I’m fine.
“He made that point very clear,” Johnson said.
When they want something known, these Washington Nationals are unmistakable. Johnson inserted Harper two innings later, after the Nationals and Boston Red Sox had played to a draw for eight innings. In minutes, the 19-year-old flash of energy decided the outcome. Harper dashed around the bases on Roger Bernadina’s game-winning, two-out double in the ninth inning, giving the Nationals a 4-3 victory at Fenway Park to cap a resounding weekend. [...]
“I know we’ve shown the baseball world what kind of team we are,” closer Tyler Clippard said. “This was kind of a statement series for us in doing that. They’re definitely a good club, and I think we’re better. I think we’re a lot better. We feel really good with what we’ve got going on right now.”
In another corner of the Nationals’ clubhouse, the statement-sweep notion did not sit well with second baseman Danny Espinosa. For him, their record means they don’t need to measure themselves against anyone; their opposition must measure themselves against the Nationals.
“I think we were the team to beat right here,” Espinosa said. “We’re the first-place team.”
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.
The outfield injuries are finally starting to come to roost I think. We got some wins thanks to guys like Nava and Podsednik but that is only going to last so long. If guys like Pedroia and Gonzalez don't get hot and do it damned soon (like tonight) we could be 8-9 out of a playoff spot pretty damned soon.
As for the Nats it's hard not to have been impressed. I don't know if they showed it on TV but Harper stumbled as he was running on the pitch when Bernadina doubled and was still flying by the time he hit second. I was very disappointed that he pinch hit and didn't swing the bat once. I really wanted to see him swing in person.
Considering the pitching matchups that the Nats can present against any team, I don't think that the Nats winning any series should shock anyone. This team is totally for real, and the Red Sox are but one more team who's found that out the hard way. And much as I dread it, the Yankees may well find it out next weekend.
To an even larger extent it's a function of where the Nationals got to draft those two years, and where the Red Sox have been drafting the last 10-15 years.
Nobody has a tandem with the upside potential of Strasburg and Harper.
Frankly, it feels a little insulting to say "potential" regarding these two guys. Strasburg is unquestionably one of the best pitchers in baseball right now and Harper probably is one of the best position players in the game. I'd like to wait a bit before anointing Harper but he's awfully good already.
Ellsbury, Pedroia, Lester, Beckett, Gonzalez and Ortiz is as good a core as anyone has.
Verlander and Cabrera might. Price and Longoria probably fall a bit short, but not much, also Kemp and Kershaw.
Right now the Nats have an OPS+ of 90 and an ERA+ of 133.
Here's a team that managed to win 100 games and go 7-1 in the postseason with an OPS+ of 84 and an ERA+ of 122. And I don't mean the 1906 White Sox.
Alfonso Soriano is available.
So assuming that the Yanks' rotation stays as it's been, it looks to be Gonzalez vs Hughes on Friday, Zimmerman vs Pettitte on Saturday, and Jackson vs Nova on Sunday. Three weeks ago I'd have called that an easy 2 wins or a sweep for the Nats, but now that Yankees' rotation has straightened itself out a bit, it should be a pretty good series. (How's that for a fearless prediction!)
I said this over in ST, too, but while getting swept sucks, I don't think anything was learned one way or the other about this club. They're still a good-not-that-good team so long as they don't have an outfield, and that's how they've been playing both during the last week (1-5 with a -2 run differential) and during the happier weeks which preceded.
Is there any way I can just build an auto-reply in the site that says "team OPS+ for NL teams is deceptive, because the baseline doesn't include pitcher hitting and the team's numbers do?" The average team OPS+ in the NL this year is 94; 90 is still below average, but it's not disastrous. You want an all-pitch, no-hit team that's contending this year, try the tied-for-first Pirates (ERA+ 118, OPS+ 76).
I'll give you Strasburg, but no way is Harper one of even the best 50 players in baseball right now. Give him another month or two and see where he is at. History is full of prospects with one month of great ball(or in his case, good ball) who the league eventually catches up to.
fire your hitting coachget the fielders hitting better.#14 - I hardly consider Gio and Znn "a bit of a break". Strasburg faded there for a couple starts and had me reaching for Brian's bottle of rye. Gio has been a real surprise and sports a 2.6 bWAR to Strasburg's 2.0 bWAR. Zimmermann has been a bit inconsistent, but he's no picnic when he's even close to being "on". When all 3 face you in a series you should consider calling in sick for that series (I mean you as a fan and them as the opposing hitters).
After suffering through all the on-field and off-field travails of the Nationals the past 7 seasons I'm still holding my breath that they don't fade after the All-Star Break, but damn this team has become really fun to watch!
Is there any way I can just build an auto-reply in the site that says "team OPS+ for NL teams is deceptive, because the baseline doesn't include pitcher hitting and the team's numbers do?" The average team OPS+ in the NL this year is 94; 90 is still below average, but it's not disastrous.
And that was exactly my point in citing the 1969 Mets.
I said this over in ST, too, but while getting swept sucks, I don't think anything was learned one way or the other about this club. They're still a good-not-that-good team so long as they don't have an outfield, and that's how they've been playing both during the last week (1-5 with a -2 run differential) and during the happier weeks which preceded.
Boy, talk about a change in tune. Just a few short days ago you were telling me that you thought that every team in your division was better than every team in our division.
Frankly, I don't believe for a second that you thought going in that there was a chance that you would get swept. Especially considering the last time a NL team swept a three game series at Fenway was ten years ago.
Livan Hernandez, John Patterson, Esteban Loaiza, Ryan Drese and Tony Armas, Jr.
VS
Stephen Strasburg, Gio Gonzalez, Jordan Zimmermann, Edwin Jackson, and Chen-Ming Wang
Yeah, that's a hell of a difference.
Yeah, I have to call you out on this too. I remember it as well.
I'd be more than happy to bet on the Sox, or any other AL East club other than the O's, against the Nats in a long series.
Any baseball fan who thinks his or her team can't get swept in a three game series doesn't understand baseball.
I'd only bet on the Sox if they were anywhere close to full strength. Not the current depleted roster, which was further depleted this weekend when, among other things, the best of the AAAA outfielders, Nava, was first hurt and then by Sunday was completely unavailable; Marlon Byrd was taking critical late game ABs with men in scoring position; and Darnell McDonald was getting multiple ABs against righthanded pitching. Oh, and Pedroia is stupidly playing hurt and can't make solid contact with the bat as a result, and Adrian Gonzalez's surgically repaired shoulder has failed and no one will acknowledge it.
I won't argue semantics here, but there aren't many prospects who were the #1 overall pick in the draft, and the BA #1 prospect in the game for two years, and then had an excellent first 38 games in the majors, and ended up not being very good major league players. I'm sure he will have his slumps this year but if the league catches up to him, it won't be for very long.
That's what impresses the hell out of me, Harper's in-game adjustments. He showed it in Atlanta against the Large Tub of Goo (¡Livan!) making Harper look like a low-A ball hitter. Next AB he reminded Livo who the better player was. Harper has done that a few more times since, learning his lesson in his first AB, then coming back and applying what he has learned in his very next plate appearance. Remarkable.
It'd be hard to think of even one 19 year old who's had as complete a package as Harper has shown on the Major League level, at least since WW2.
I think he's about as much of a lock as being a very good major league player as any 19 year old has been. I don't think that is a debate at all. He's going to be a star provided he doesn't Josh Hamilton his life. I just don't think it's realistic to look at any talented ballplayers first month in the majors and think that is indicative of how good he actually is right now.
Arom pointed it out several. (I would have included Arod though--although his first full year was age 20, and his results in age 19 weren't that impressive)
Yount didn't really bring much to the table until he was 22. He was lucky to be in the right place at the right time to play at that age. I'm pretty sure that if his career were replayed in almost any other time, or any other team, he spends an extra 2-3 years in the minors.
Why wouldn't his current performance be indicative of his current ability (especially since it's not like he's slugging 1.000 or doing anything else obviously unsustainable)? At most you can say "we don't have enough data to know how good he is right now", which is a long way from "no way is he one of the top 50 position players right now".
Absolutely off-topic, but while I largely agree with the words above, I don't agree with the sentiment. There's a lot of "our front office is playing chess while the rest of the league thinks it's checkers" talk. Every time a non-frontline player is put on the DL and his bones didn't actually come out of the skin, there's an unspoken assumption that he's being DL'd for nefarious reasons that have nothing to do with injury; mostly to get the hot young golden boy into the lineup.
Yeah, I'd characterize the attitude more of "Our front office is playing chess, which is odd, since it's actually a game of checkers."
Because he hasn't been scouted enough by live eyes. Second time through the league is when you make or break young players. You separate the Maas's from the Griffeys.
There has only been one player in the past 50 years to post over a 110 ops+ in the majors at 19(400+ pa). Be optimistic, say he is 110 ops+ with plus's across the board. I'm not sure that makes him one of the best players at his position. We'll be generous and say he's a centerfielder. We'll even go say he's an above average fielder. Would a 110 ops+ centerfielder above average be considered top 5 at his position? I would say Kemp, Hamilton, McCutchen, Granderson, Bourn, Jay, Adam Jones, all are better than him right this moment(not counting health) and that Trout could make an argument seeing as he's having a better season and is the better defensive player. If you claim him as a right fielder, I think he falls even further behind the positional rankings.
He's impressive, and he is already a league average major league starter right now. Saying anything more than that, is buying into the hype.
Using real results, even if the sample size is small, seems like a better basis to judge a player than using numbers pulled out of some Internet commenter's rectum.
Trout v. Harper feels like what Mantle v. Mays must have, or more contemporarily, Vlad Guerrero and Andruw Jones. They didn't turn into Inner Circle types, but Vlad's is likely going to be a Hall of Famer, and Jones probably should be. It's exciting to think that Trout/Harper could surpass that.
That is fine, you can use real results based upon an unscouted, player first time through the league, that is a great way to rate players. I mean Kevin Maas, and Chris Shelton are hof players that the league never figured out. I mean the fact that only Tony C has been able to post over a 110 ops+ as a 19 year old, doesn't make you think? Mantle, couldn't, Arod couldn't Griffey couldn't.
Griffey had a .880 ops after 46 games finished the season with a .748 ops. That is the standard that Harper is looking at matching. I think expecting any more is foolish.
Wait... Andruw Jones?
He had his last HoF-type year at 29. The last time he played more than 107 games he was 30.
Sound like you would expect him to have a hot start and then start to struggle.
It's a small sample size, of course, but Harper's only getting better.
As of today, he has 163 plate appearances. Let's just cut that in half arbitrarily.
PAs 1-80: .246/.338/.449/.787 That includes 9 BB and 14 K.
PAs 81-163: .315/.398/.589/.987 That includes 10 BB and 12 K. (That's also a 35 HR pace over 162 games)
Of course, these are small samples cut from an already small sample. Still, the league is not slowing him down, yet.
The bottom line for me is that the Nationals now have two of the five most exciting and fun players in the game. I can't wait 'til they're in Milwaukee late in July. Hopefully Strasburg is pitching and Harper is making the same adjustments he has over the last three weeks.
I'm not expecting anything, I'm waiting and seeing. You're the one that's already cast judgment, based on even less evidence than the 163 PA he has in the books.
I agree. I hope Harper has an all star year. I hope he has a hof career and continues to show the enjoyment and energy he has for the game. He can be a positive to the game. He could be a marketing goldmine.
That is perfectly ok. I just don't see anything that indicates to me that he's one of the best players at his position in the game, unless I extend the definition of one of the best to top 20 at his position. He's going to finish the season as roughly a league average player. That in itself is extremely impressive, anything more than that is icing on the cake.
Who are the other three?
Well, I should say other two. Adam Dunn needs to be in there somewhere.
Can you give me some stock tips?
Chris Perez and a six-way tie between Millwood, Furbush, Pryor, Luetge, League, and Wilhelmsen.
I'll take the over on that. I think he has the kind of baseball smarts and instincts that you don't often see in someone that young, combined with that kind of skill. His over-exuberance sometimes gets the better of him, but he also seems to be learning as he goes. I think he is something special.
Tony C's a good comparison as a hitter, but as you note, he lacked Harper's overall skill set. None of the other three were the offensive force at 19 that Harper is today, and none of them even came close to Harper's batting eye and his ability to lay off the bad pitch, which is a pretty good indication in itself that his performance isn't a fluke.
-----------------------------------------------------
Phil Caveretta
After a blazing 23 PA's as a 17 year old, Cavarretta shrunk to OPS+s of 93 and 81 in his first two full seasons at 18 and 19. He's not even on the radar. And Andruw Jones didn't reach triple figures until he was 21.
Same here. Harper already has 1.1 bWAR in 38 games, with over 100 left to play. I guess it's possible he's been way over his head with the bat so far, but he sure isn't physically overmatched, his plate discipline is impressive, and he's demonstrated the ability to make adjustments on the fly. I'll be shocked if he's not an above average player by bWAR this year. Going forward, the sky's the limit.
and yeah, we'll see how he does, right along with trout and heyward and trumbo and everyone else
the nats pitching staff is freaking unbelieveable i still can't believe billy beane threw gio gonzalez away. you could have a WS team this year, just about, from the good players he's traded away in the past 5 years
Wow, the Unabomber didn't have much of a career given the early start.
This. The guy is essentially a CHILD and he's hitting like Reggie Jackson, give or take.
I think you may be confusing Bryce Harper with somebody who is, well, unscouted.
The Internet has made everything easier, including getting really good at sports when you're really young.
On the flipside, it's really hard to play MLB baseball if you're under 23 or so, this has been proven over a century. Perhaps no amount of preparation can replace the experience necessary to succeed, int eh vast amount of cases.
I'm just sorta meandering here but I think it's an interesting topic.
You don't understand how shortstops hit in the 1970s. You had two choices, a shortstop who hit .250 with no power and stole bases, or a shortstop who hit .250 with no power and did not steal bases. Toby Harrah had power, but he was a big exception. Even guys like Larry Bowa, who played for years, had years where he hit .211.
Yount could hit for a MLB shortstop immediately, that was never an issue. I grant you that a good team wouldn't have been patient with the errors like the Brewers were. But his bat was enough from Day 1 and better than that soon after.
This is a good post. Go back and look at some of the HOM MVP votes, they're into the 1970s now. It's not like this was a total deadball era; Johnny Bench hit 40 homers and Billy Williams hit .333 with 37 homers. Dick Allen had a 1023 OPS. Chris Speier hit .269 with 15 homers and ended up around 8-12 on most ballots.
Eddie Brinkman was once traded to the Tigers, along with Joe Coleman, Aurelio Rodriguez and Jim Hannan, for Denny McLain, Elliott Maddox, Norm McRae and Don Wert. McLain, of course, was worthless. Joe Coleman won 62 games in the first three years with the Tigers. Rodriguez was a starter and a good glove at 3B for 9 years. Brinkman hit .222 over 4 years as a starter with the Tigers.
There are actually longtime baseball observers who I know who commonly refer to this trade as the "Brinkman Heist." Brinkman hit .203 in 72 and finished 9th in the AL MVP voting.
I just saw the highlight of him getting thrown out at third - it was a dumb move. If he had been going on contact he would have made it to third standing up, but he had to wait to make sure the ball got past the firt baseman (it was a low liner and could have been caught).
He may be getting the same highlight reel coverage, but his exposure is still going to be a lot less, since more than half of Trout's games are only about half over by the time half of the country has gone to bed. And while West Coast viewers who miss Harper's games due to work get to see the highlights of those games in West Coast prime time, East Coast viewers who miss Trout's heroics have to see them either before they go to work the next day or risk missing them altogether. East Coast nightowls and ESPN addicts are exceptions to this, but they don't comprise that big a percentage of the population.
Bottom line is that it's not a conspiracy, it's geography. OTOH West Coast viewers never have to stay up past midnight to catch the end of games, which is more than worth the tradeoff.
?? Was Harper born famous?
Or are you just saying Harper was famous before signing with an East Coast team? Did he get famous before it was known that Wash had the first overall pick (honest question, I don't remember)?
Anyway, I may just be a proud papa roto-baseball owner, but I'm on team trout (2-4 last night with a HR, a BB, and 2 steals).
Yes, he had a huge head start over Trout in the fame department.
MLB should be doing everything possible to get both of those guys in the game. They're likely to be two of the biggest faces in the game for the next decade, so it only makes sense to show them off to a national audience as much as possible.
Yes. Mike Trout got his attention after hitting .350 at a few minor league stops, having the build that suggests he'd develop power, and running to first under 4 seconds. Mike Trout has, in the last year or so, just caught up to the fame level Harper had as a high school sophomore.
Harper's early fame and hype machine makes him the LeBron James of baseball. What's particularly amazing is that so far he's lived up to that.
I hope he and Trout both do. Based on their youth and talent levels, those guys have the chance to be historically significant superstars, and could really help energize existing fans while drawing new ones.
Who are the best right-handed power/speed guys ever aside from Rickey? It's silly to start looking in that direction after just a few months, but he's just that good.
Mays, Bobby Bonds, Dawson jump to mind.
Yeah. I've noticed that too. If he didn't have baseball talent he'd still be a candidate to play young Mickey in a movie.
Less game but probably more raw power and raw speed than all of them: Bo Jackson.
Edit: And if we're discussing best power speed combos then it's time for the weekly mention of Eric Davis.
A-Rod. Eric Davis.
Makes more sense to me than Trout as Mantle.
Evidently it's time for a collective Mel Ott facepalm. Granted, there was a WW2 caveat, but still. You'd think one of us would have *thought* of the guy...
a) too much
b) too soon
c) unfair to Trout, giving him a nearly impossible expectation?
Pasta-diving Trout!
a) too much
b) too soon
c) unfair to Trout, giving him a nearly impossible expectation?
True, but then again no player in history, including Trout and Harper, has ever had the level of expectation going into his rookie year that Mickey Mantle had. Remember that Harper didn't exactly tear up the Grapefruit League, and wasn't even doing that much in AAA when he was called up. OTOH Mantle had spent the entire Spring of 1951 hitting one tape measure home run after another on the Yankees' barnstorming tour (656 ft., anyone?), and then culminated it by getting 4 hits and a home run in Ebbets Field in the last exhibition game of the year. Harper had a lot more buildup as an amateur and as a draftee than Mantle, but nobody expected him to hit the ground running the way that it was almost assumed that Mantle would.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main