Wow. They went and Dunn it

2 years 20 million. Not bad. Not bad at all.

(how many interleague games in AL parks do we play over the next two years?)

No compensation (as was pointed out to me) -- still have that top of the 2nd round pick.

And in 2010, he'll cost a contender just $3.3 mil to rent for August and September.

Really, when you boil it all down, this means at least we'll have some exciting at-bats on MASN for the good guys. I'll admit it right now, I am looking forward to seeing Dunn hit for the Nats. I want to see how far he can drive a ball at Nats Park. I may stay tuned an extra inning or two to see if he can cut our 8-4 deficit in half with one swing.

I am not looking forward to all the extra bases and bloop singles that are in our future. Perhaps 1B is his final resting place. If so, I wouldn't start clearing space in your trophy room for a Gold Glove just yet Mr. Zimmerman.

If Dunn does nothing else, at least he has taken a small step toward breaking the "no one will play in Washington" mystique. No one thought Pudge's signing in Detroit was the start of something . . .

Finally, will there be a fist fight over who gets to hit behind Dunn? Zimm might not know what to do if he came up with men on all the time.

And, just for FJB, The Worst GM in baseball.

Being Right and a modest proposal

Bang Zoom is ahead of the curve . . . teams are factoring defense into their value calculations . . .

And speaking of that it seems retirement is preferable to Ray Durham rather than suffer the indignities of working for half the year for $850,000. I suppose 16x the median family income (rounded to 50k) is almost too much pain to bear.

I have not looked up Durham's defensive metrics but off the top of my head the word that comes to mind is statue. I look forward to be proven wrong, I hope not but I've already stuck my foot in it once or twice.

Durham's offensive contribution would be exactly what the Nats need. A .380 OBP guy at the top of the lineup.

Of course, if he gives all that back with the lack of leather then his estimation of his value is way off.

So, here's a free idea for the Players Association (who I'm sure have much more important things to do today like leaking the other 103 PED criminals and preparing for the mother of all lawsuits from A-Roid.)

Offensive and defensive substitutions. Wouldn't a Ray Durham/Anderson Hernandez hitting/fielding platoon be great? How about an Adam Dunn/Ryan Langerhans platoon?

I know its not traditional but this way, we would get the best possible baseball. The best hitters against the best fielders. More hot shots in the hole and more diving stops. More line drives to the gaps and more diving catches.

I wonder which side would win? Would games become 10-9 slugfests or would the increased offense be offset by the better defense? All we'd be left with is more exciting baseball. And we can't have that can we?

Eat Crow

So, Mr. Crow's back working for fry cook wages in Fort Worth?

I wonder if he ever thinks that

1) There is no way, no how he's getting a $3.7 bonus in this environment (And I know the highest offer was $3.5 but time value of money)

2) He's a year farther (and a year of potential injury) away from when some team will vastly overpay for his services. How much bigger will that contract have to be to make up for the extra year of risk and the extra year of being underpaid (assuming he ever reaches replacement level)

For my amusement

That's what baseball players are. Or rather what they do. They amuse me.

Frankly, I don't care what they do when they aren't playing unless it directly affects me. And that's highly unlikely.

Which is why I am so uninterested in who took what when and how did it impact their performance.

You mean these guys are doing something to make them BETTER performers? And I'm supposed to be outraged? I suppose if you fervently need to believe that the human endeavor you are witnessing is solely the result of natural athletic ability honed to a fine skill through unwavering practice then you would be shocked and dismayed.

I hold no such illusions.

I really don't care one iota about PED's. From baseball's perspective however, they are trying to cater to the largest possible audience. If a significant percentage of the audience decided that they simply must believe in the myth, then baseball will provide them with cover and install all the random testing they can get away with.

Perhaps some one can tell me why it was OK for Gaylord Perry to cheat his way into the Hall of Fame but Barry Bonds, A-Rod, Raffy Palmerio and Roger Clemens will be shunned? Is it PED's or is it personality? These four are the biggest names enmeshed in the "scandal" and they (at least 3 of them anyway) share the same trait, they are not engaging personalities who have a good and easy rapport with the media.

And while I'm at it, I'd really like someone to tell me the exact difference between Tommy John surgery and PED's? If I tore my ulnar collateral ligament, I seriously doubt my doctor would rip a ligament from another part of me to fix my elbow. I mean, I'll still be able to USE the arm. It's not medically necessary for me to live thrive and survive unless I want to throw a baseball very hard again. Isn't that basically a performance enhancing medical procedure?

I know you can make the illegal argument . . . but come on. What's the over/under on percentage of baseball players that have used illegal drugs? 70-80%? Pot makes you lazy, at least the cream and the clear mean you'll be out there earning your oversized salaries.

They guy on PED's is trying to win. That's what I want from my players if I'm a fan. I want my guys to win. It gives me faux satisfaction. So, I consider it a far smaller "crime" than what Pete Rose or the Black Sox did. This ain't professional wrestling, I want to know that everyone on the field is trying to win. As long as that is intact, I'll be watching. And I won't be alone.

Smartest move yet

Heard on the Sports Reporters tonight: Thom Lovarro reported that 2 front office types (unnamed) told him that the Nats flirtation with Mark Texeira was nothing more than an attempt by Scott Boras to drive up his price to the Yankees. The Nats would get preferential treatment for Boras "client" Steve Strasburg in June in return for spooking Hal Steinbrenner to pry open the checkbook a little wider.

This sounds like sour grapes to me, but God help me I HOPE it is true.

I want an FO that is looking for every competitive edge it can find. As I go on about, this crew has failed so far to use its huge financial resources to improve the on field product.

Here they made a smart move at virtually no cost. If it helps them sign Strasburg sooner then it will have been well worth it.

Not that I still have confidence they will be able to accomplish that. I have generally sided with the Plan and the virtue of patience. However, the Hill arbitration has given me pause to reconsider that position.

Now, its not like Hill is going to be a major contributor, but 50K??? I could find that in the Lerner's couch cushions. It's not necessary to over pay or everyone (are you listening Danny Boy) but over the small stuff, be an organization that at least appears to want to make its player happy and successful. Go that extra mile (or 50K) and generate some goodwill.

Teams getting smarter?

Nats Journal has a discussion of the Sheinin piece on the 90 or so FA's left on the market at this late date.

Explanations range from collusion to the economy to steroids??

Perhaps another factor is the rise of more nuanced measures of player value.

For example, the two big sluggers left, Dunn and Ramirez, have the gaudiest set of power numbers you could imagine. I doubt many in baseball think that either of them will significantly decline from their prior performance next year.

But they also share something else in common. They are both atrocious defenders. In fact, they are so bad, they give up almost all their positive hitting value. Or at least they give up enough to make their demands (based on their offensive contributions) far higher that teams (basing value on offense AND defense) are willing to go.

Mark Texeria had no trouble finding plenty of suitors willing to pay top dollar. He provides offense and defense.

Sheets is haunted by the ghosts of Jason Schmidt. No one wants to give a guaranteed contract to a guy who's arm may fall off at any time (although that didn't stop the Yankees giving A.J. Burnett 85 million.)

And can someone please do a study about players and their decline phase? Did Nolan Ryan use HGH to throw 96mph at 46? Did Pete Rose load up on andro when he broke the hit record in his mid 40s. There have always been players who perform well at advanced ages. There have always been players who's performance has fallen off a cliff in their mid 30? Remember Dale Murphy? 2 time NL MVP . . . became replacement level for the last 5 or 6 years of his career. And I've never heard anyone explain that by saying he suddenly stopped juicing.

Would you do these deals?

For all the bloggers who are demanding some "action" by the Nats FO, please ask yourself this question:

What would your reaction be to news that Jim Bo had just dealt Destin Hood for Ben Sheets? Or Orlando Hudson?

Would you say that this was a wise use of a prospect to acquire a proven veteran to help the 2009 club? Or would you kill him for trading away potentially a lot of value for production in a season that is lost from the get go? What about just getting this proven veteran for just one year? Is that worth giving up one of the top 50 draft eligible players?

Because signing Hudson, Manny or Sheets would essentially be this trade. All those Type A FA's mean the first pick in round 2 would go to someone else. And I know that a 2nd round pick has about a 10% chance of becoming a major league contributor but don't we need MORE of these chances rather than less? You can't win the lottery if you don't play.

It wasn't Greg Vaughn Fred McGriff or Wade Boggs that put the Tampa Rays into the world series. It was Evan Longoria (4th overall pick), B.J. Upton (2nd overall pick) and to a lesser extent David Price (1st overall pick). That represents three pretty crappy seasons (the Nats have yet to select higher than 6th I believe until now.)

From a fan's POV, it would be great to watch Manny 40 dingers next season. Or watch Ben Sheets stay healthy and be a true ace. But does that get the Nats closer to permanent contention? Cause it doesn't look like we have an ownership group that will go the Yankee route and spend till it hurt to be competitive every season.

note: I am a dumbass. And so is Josh Byrnes. Because he's the guy who didn't offer Adam Dunn arbitration. Why? Don't know. Was he afraid Dunn would take a one year deal when he had been talking about a 9 figure deal all season? Did he enjoy paying prospects and over $4M (1.3rd of Dunn's salary last year) for those two months? On the plus side, he did give his club a chance to go to the post season in a very weak division and absent Manny's run, perhaps the D Backs could have snuck in. But that seems like a steep price to pay and get nothing out of it.