Did the Nats just help us (and the rest of the division)?

blueagleace1

blueagleace1

Playing the Waiting Game
First off, I am sorry for the length of this post but it just took a lot to get my point across and I hope most of you will read it and chime in.

Secondly, I am very surprised that there hasn't been a thread created about the Nationals signing Max Scherzer...

Now back to my original question.. "Did the Nationals just do us and the rest of the division a favor by signing Max Scherzer"? Before you laugh and leave, hear me out...

There is no question that the Washington Nationals are the favorites to win the NL East in 2015 and many even consider them to be undeniably, the favorites to win the World Series. So how could they be doing us a favor? Before they (Nationals) signed Scherzer, they boasted the best rotation in baseball -Strasburg, Zimmerman, Fister, Gonzalez, and Roark- and now add the best available free agent of the off-season in Scherzer and you potentially have one of the best rotations of all-time. It's not this year that this move could benefit us -or the rest of the NL East for that matter- but in 2016 and beyond. There are varying reports out there with some saying, "Zimmerman will be traded" (link 1), some proclaim "Strasburg said to be very much available and will be traded" (link 2a/2b), and then most saying "Even with the Scherzer signing don't expect Washington to trade a starter" (link 3a/3b). Let's go with the last. Currently, Washington will have the following players becoming free agents after next season alone:

1. Jordan Zimmerman

2. Ian Desmond

3. Doug Fister

4. Denard Span

5. Matt Thorton

6. Jerry Blevins

Those first four guys are major contributors to that team, and in the case of Zimmerman, Desmond, and possibly Fister will command an extremely large deal ($100 million plus). The Nationals had a record 2014 Opening Day payroll of $125,615,337 (link 4) which actually rose to roughly $139,508,393 (link 5) by the end of the year, and all of which owner Mark Lerner said (in reference to their record Opening Day payroll) "We're beyond tapped out" (link 6). As things currently stand, Washington is set to have an Opening Day payroll of roughly $147,800,000 in 2015, which is $22,184,663 more than in 2014, in the season in which their owner said they were "Beyond tapped out". If they were indeed truly "tapped out" and they are just biting the bullet on Scherzer for this one season before Zimmerman (2015 salary = $16.5 million), Desmond (2015 salary = $11 million), Span (2015 salary = $9 million), and Fister (2015 salary = $11.4 million) become free agents and come off the books for a total of $47.9 million, they would basically be swapping Scherzer for Zimmerman and Fister in their rotation. Obviously now after signing Scherzer, there is no way for them to resign all of their free agents (many who again, are key pieces) and after general raises in most long term contract, not to mention arbitration raises for the rest of their roster -many will command a large increase, such as Strasburg, Harper, Ramos, Storen- I can't foresee them being able to sign but MAYBE one key free agent (don't think they can afford Zimmerman, Desmond, or Fister).

So the point of me saying all that is this: Would we as Braves fans have rather them (A) sign Max Scherzer, who will be pitching in his age 30-37 season's during the life of his contract with Washington, which will also result in them loosing Jordan Zimmerman (who is only 28), Ian Desmond (29), and Doug Fister (30) and to a lesser extent, lessen their ability to sign free agents. OR (B) Passed on Scherzer and had the ability to resign at least two of Zimmerman, Desmond, Fister, and Span or other big name free agents for that matter? Me personally, I am rather glad they spent $210 million on a single pitcher who will be pitching in thru his age 37 season in D.C and making $15 million each year thru 2028.

The last think to consider is this: Was it really wise to spend that kind of money on Scherzer when you have so many upcoming free agents who are big keys to your success and not to mention the fact that you are going to have guys like Strasburg, Harper, Ramos, and Rendon who are going to start getting expensive and who you are going to want to extend before they get to expensive but will cost a ton to lock up. So in the end, I am kinda glad Washington decided to sign Scherzer because I think it helps us in the long run (will obviously hurt us this year) and hey, what would bring more joy to me than us signing Jordan Zimmerman next offseason and riding his arm to many division titles and a World Series win!!

Link #1- https://twitter.com/jonmorosi/status/556947427388059650

Link #2(a)- http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-enormous-trade-value-of-stephen-strasburg/

Link #2(b)- https://twitter.com/JPerrotto/status/557224801769910273

Link #3(a)- https://twitter.com/Joelsherman1/status/557152140662423552

Link #3(b)- http://sports.yahoo.com/news/why-nationals-should-keep-their-loaded-staff-together--even-after-adding-max-scherzer-101406035.html

Link #4- http://espn.go.com/mlb/team/salaries/_/name/wsh/washington-nationals

Link #5- http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/washington-nationals/payroll/2014/

Link #6- http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/10728533/washington-nationals-owner-mark-lerner-says-payroll-topped-out
 
CyYoung31 said:
We'll see. Money can make many problems go away in this sport, and the Nats have a lot of it.
Click to expand...

Yes they do, but they also have a bunch tied up in future commitments and have future free agents who will cost a pretty penny to keep. So while they indeed have a large payroll, they don't/won't have much to spend.
 
We don't know the Nats' limit as to the payroll. They say they're topped out but are they really? Just now, they've shown that they can still spend beyond they're supposed 'limit' when they want to. So yeah, I guess, we' ll see.
 
Don't like these sorts of long-term deals for pitchers. So I'm happy to see the gnats do it.
 
I think it's similar to the Bobby bonilla deal. They are going to regret paying him $15mil a year 7 years after his contract is up and he is retired
 
Hopefully it helps the Braves realize it's moronic to trade away almost all of their good hitters without any significant replacements.

Washington may wind up regretting it in 4-5 years, but if they've won a couple of titles by then, isn't it mission accomplished?
 
You bring up how much money they have coming off the books, that does allow them some flexibility (and holes to fill). They also have Werth coming off at 20+ million.

I think they either A) trading Strasburg or B) Know they are losing Zimmermann and Fister and felt they needed to acquire another ace (along with Lerner being 90 and wanting team to "go for it")

They have done a good job recently though and with the loss of Zim/Fister, could still have a rotation of Max, Stras, Gio, Roark,Cole with Giolito, Fedde, and Lopez in the minors developing.

I get the feeling they don't want to pay Desmond what it would take to sign him. He's been a key piece for them, but I think they recognize the risk in signing him. They will slide Escobar over to SS for the 2016 season (late 2016 until Turner is ready) Think their core for 2017 is:

1B- Zimmerman
3B- Rendon
CF- Taylor
RF- Harper

To go with a really cheap rotation, they probably have the money to acquire some type of premium position player and cheap out at SS/2B with Turner/?

7 years for a pitcher is extremely risky and they are going to need that implied value over the first 3-4 years of the deal (25-30 million worth of value for 15 million price tag) At that point, they need to hope that Giolito/Lopez/Fedde/Cole work out.
 
Tyhe Nats are in good shape and they would be really smart to trade Strasburg right now for a massive haul of hitting prospects. I think Giolito is the top pitching prospect in all of baseball - so they should be fine there for years to come.
 
Nats have money. That fixes most things as long as there is still patience with development.
 
Another thing is all of those guys will probably get a QO, so they could get 3-4 first round picks out of it. Not to bad.
 
blueagleace1 said:
First off, I am sorry for the length of this post but it just took a lot to get my point across and I hope most of you will read it and chime in.

Secondly, I am very surprised that there hasn't been a thread created about the Nationals signing Max Scherzer...

Now back to my original question.. "Did the Nationals just do us and the rest of the division a favor by signing Max Scherzer"? Before you laugh and leave, hear me out...

There is no question that the Washington Nationals are the favorites to win the NL East in 2015 and many even consider them to be undeniably, the favorites to win the World Series. So how could they be doing us a favor? Before they (Nationals) signed Scherzer, they boasted the best rotation in baseball -Strasburg, Zimmerman, Fister, Gonzalez, and Roark- and now add the best available free agent of the off-season in Scherzer and you potentially have one of the best rotations of all-time. It's not this year that this move could benefit us -or the rest of the NL East for that matter- but in 2016 and beyond. There are varying reports out there with some saying, "Zimmerman will be traded" (link 1), some proclaim "Strasburg said to be very much available and will be traded" (link 2a/2b), and then most saying "Even with the Scherzer signing don't expect Washington to trade a starter" (link 3a/3b). Let's go with the last. Currently, Washington will have the following players becoming free agents after next season alone:

1. Jordan Zimmerman
2. Ian Desmond
3. Doug Fister
4. Denard Span
5. Matt Thorton
6. Jerry Blevins

Those first four guys are major contributors to that team, and in the case of Zimmerman, Desmond, and possibly Fister will command an extremely large deal ($100 million plus). The Nationals had a record 2014 Opening Day payroll of $125,615,337 (link 4) which actually rose to roughly $139,508,393 (link 5) by the end of the year, and all of which owner Mark Lerner said (in reference to their record Opening Day payroll) "We're beyond tapped out" (link 6). As things currently stand, Washington is set to have an Opening Day payroll of roughly $147,800,000 in 2015, which is $22,184,663 more than in 2014, in the season in which their owner said they were "Beyond tapped out". If they were indeed truly "tapped out" and they are just biting the bullet on Scherzer for this one season before Zimmerman (2015 salary = $16.5 million), Desmond (2015 salary = $11 million), Span (2015 salary = $9 million), and Fister (2015 salary = $11.4 million) become free agents and come off the books for a total of $47.9 million, they would basically be swapping Scherzer for Zimmerman and Fister in their rotation. Obviously now after signing Scherzer, there is no way for them to resign all of their free agents (many who again, are key pieces) and after general raises in most long term contract, not to mention arbitration raises for the rest of their roster -many will command a large increase, such as Strasburg, Harper, Ramos, Storen- I can't foresee them being able to sign but MAYBE one key free agent (don't think they can afford Zimmerman, Desmond, or Fister).

So the point of me saying all that is this: Would we as Braves fans have rather them (A) sign Max Scherzer, who will be pitching in his age 30-37 season's during the life of his contract with Washington, which will also result in them loosing Jordan Zimmerman (who is only 28), Ian Desmond (29), and Doug Fister (30) and to a lesser extent, lessen their ability to sign free agents. OR (B) Passed on Scherzer and had the ability to resign at least two of Zimmerman, Desmond, Fister, and Span or other big name free agents for that matter? Me personally, I am rather glad they spent $210 million on a single pitcher who will be pitching in thru his age 37 season in D.C and making $15 million each year thru 2028.

The last think to consider is this: Was it really wise to spend that kind of money on Scherzer when you have so many upcoming free agents who are big keys to your success and not to mention the fact that you are going to have guys like Strasburg, Harper, Ramos, and Rendon who are going to start getting expensive and who you are going to want to extend before they get to expensive but will cost a ton to lock up. So in the end, I am kinda glad Washington decided to sign Scherzer because I think it helps us in the long run (will obviously hurt us this year) and hey, what would bring more joy to me than us signing Jordan Zimmerman next offseason and riding his arm to many division titles and a World Series win!!

Link #1- https://twitter.com/jonmorosi/status/556947427388059650
Link #2(a)- http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-enormous-trade-value-of-stephen-strasburg/
Link #2(b)- https://twitter.com/JPerrotto/status/557224801769910273
Link #3(a)- https://twitter.com/Joelsherman1/status/557152140662423552
Link #3(b)- http://sports.yahoo.com/news/why-nationals-should-keep-their-loaded-staff-together--even-after-adding-max-scherzer-101406035.html
Link #4- http://espn.go.com/mlb/team/salaries/_/name/wsh/washington-nationals
Link #5- http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/washington-nationals/payroll/2014/
Link #6- http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/10728533/washington-nationals-owner-mark-lerner-says-payroll-topped-out
Click to expand...

Wait, didn't Strasbourg have Tommy John surgery a while back??????????????????????? Just food for thought.............
 
Very interesting. I don't see money being an issue for one of the new darlings of MLB but it could happen. Would be great to see.

And if this Nats team doesn't win it all in the next few years (even more than once), the implosion of that clubhouse and organization could be historic. That would be fun to watch if some lower payroll team beat them for the ring.

To me, there's three 'teams' for every one: the one you assemble on paper and Spring Training before games start, the one that trudges through the entire season to make the play-offs and the one that you bring to the play-offs if you make it. Nats look like they've won the first team but there's still 162 games + play-offs to go. A lot can happen with big talent/ big ego/ big attitude baseball 'professionals'.
 
Nats will have a little moroe vertical room, but not much is my hunch. THey aren't gonna be the Dodgers or Yankees cause they dont' have the TV deal that have. MLB darling or not. Cards are the MLB darling and they have never flown that high. They have a lot of guys who'll be FA who they can replace but won't be easy.

Nats are heading towards their young talent bubble. Getting Scherzer is a go fior it now move with some long term potnetial Nats FAs (sorry if I'm including cut or traded players, I don't care about the Nats that much) each of the next 3 seasons with other notes

After 2015
Zimmermann
Fister
Desmond
Span
Thorton

After 2016
Gio (option)
Strasburg
Storen
Ramos
Stammen
First arb year for Harper so a big raise will be happening there

After 2017
Werth (which is good for them)
Gio (if his option is picked up)
Espinosa
Last season of Harper.
 
This is a similar position to where the Phillies are/were. A few years ago, they were a solid veteran team having a lot of success. Now they are a dumpster fire. Was their few years of dominance worth spending several years in payroll purgatory as they are now? Obviously a matter of opinion, but I have been impressed by how the Braves have been able to reload over the years without ever becoming truly pathetic. Most teams go through that cycle.

While this may (or may not) be the time when the Braves go through that cycle, it looks to me like the FO is doing all they can to make it a pretty quick cycle. I think they were wise to not make the kind of long term commitments that could have lead to short term success at the cost of the kind of long term suckage that the Phillies are going through now, and the Nationals appear to be setting themselves up for in a few years.

I hope they are right.
 
mfree80 said:
This is a similar position to where the Phillies are/were. A few years ago, they were a solid veteran team having a lot of success. Now they are a dumpster fire. Was their few years of dominance worth spending several years in payroll purgatory as they are now? Obviously a matter of opinion, but I have been impressed by how the Braves have been able to reload over the years without ever becoming truly pathetic. Most teams go through that cycle.

While this may (or may not) be the time when the Braves go through that cycle, it looks to me like the FO is doing all they can to make it a pretty quick cycle. I think they were wise to not make the kind of long term commitments that could have lead to short term success at the cost of the kind of long term suckage that the Phillies are going through now, and the Nationals appear to be setting themselves up for in a few years.

I hope they are right.
Click to expand...

The difference between the Nats and PHils are the Nats held on to there aging core too long (Nats core is much younger than the Phillies) , gave big contracts to the wrong players (Howard), depleted their already poor farm system, and drafted poorly.

Still, a win now mode does put pressure on the team to win immediately and pushes future considerations back.
 
mfree80 said:
This is a similar position to where the Phillies are/were. A few years ago, they were a solid veteran team having a lot of success. Now they are a dumpster fire. Was their few years of dominance worth spending several years in payroll purgatory as they are now? Obviously a matter of opinion, but I have been impressed by how the Braves have been able to reload over the years without ever becoming truly pathetic. Most teams go through that cycle.

While this may (or may not) be the time when the Braves go through that cycle, it looks to me like the FO is doing all they can to make it a pretty quick cycle. I think they were wise to not make the kind of long term commitments that could have lead to short term success at the cost of the kind of long term suckage that the Phillies are going through now, and the Nationals appear to be setting themselves up for in a few years.

I hope they are right.
Click to expand...

Well the Phillies and Nats aren't really comparable. PHillies traded their farm away, Nats have only made a handful of trades in the past year. Traded Detwiler for spects, Traded for Asdrubal Cabrera (no top prospects), and Fister who they kept all their top prospects in place to get. None have gutted their farm which still has a lot of good arms in it.

Phillies also made the Ryan Howard mistake. Which the Nats really haven't yet, Zimmerman was a bad signing but not even a little close to how bad the Howard sigining was.
 
Buster Olney: Winners and losers of the Scherzer deal

http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/bus...id=InsiderTwitter_Olney_ScherzerWinnersLosers

Winners: The Braves

Their decision to swap assets with short-term value -- Jason Heyward, Justin Upton and Evan Gattis -- in order to load up for 2017 looks better today, in light of how strong the Nationals appear to be. Over the next two years, Zimmermann, Fister and Stephen Strasburg are all headed for free agency, and by the start of the 2017 season, when the Braves are scheduled to open their new park, Atlanta should be positioned for a counterpunch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top